,x^60Sr%

vC1
PRO^
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Audit Report
Fiscal 2004 and 2003 Financial
Statements for the Pesticides
Reregistration and Expedited
Processing Fund
Report No. 2005-1-00081
May 4, 2005

-------
Abbreviations
EPA	Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA	Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
FMFIA Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act
FQPA	Food Quality Protection Act
OMB	Office of Management and Budget

-------
y^DSr^
V
*> ^
PRO^

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
At a Glance
2005-1-00081
May 4, 2005
Why We Did This Review
The Food Quality Protection
Act requires that we perform
an annual audit of the
Pesticides Reregistration and
Expedited Processing Fund
(known as FIFRA) financial
statements.
Background
The EPA is responsible for
reassessing the safety of older
pesticide registrations against
modern health and
environmental testing
standards. To expedite this
reregistration process,
Congress authorized EPA to
collect fees from pesticide
manufacturers. The fees are
deposited into the FIFRA
Fund. Each year, the Agency
prepares financial statements
that present financial
information about the Fund,
along with information about
EPA's progress in
reregistering pesticides.
For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional and Public
Liaison at (202) 566-2391.
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Fiscal 2004 and 2003 Financial Statements for the
Pesticides Reregistration and Expedited Processing Fund
Opinion
We rendered an unqualified, or clean, opinion on EPA's Pesticides Reregistration
and Expedited Processing Fund Financial Statements for fiscal 2004 and 2003,
meaning that they were fairly presented and free of material misstatement.
Internal Control Reportable Conditions Noted
We identified the following reportable conditions:
We could not assess the adequacy of automated controls.
EPA needs to improve financial statement preparation and quality control.
Compliance with Laws and Regulations
We tested compliance with those laws and regulations that could either materially
affect the FIFRA Fund financial statements or that we considered significant to
the audit. The objective of our audit, including our tests of compliance with
applicable laws and regulations, was not to provide an opinion on overall
compliance with such provisions. Accordingly, we do not express such an
opinion.
What We Recommend
We recommend that the Director, Reporting and Analysis Staff, Office of the
Chief Financial Officer: (a) ensure that products issued from the office, especially
Financial Statements, footnotes, supplemental information, and overviews, are
properly reviewed prior to release or submittal for audit; and (b) establish
milestone due dates for the FIFRA 2005 financial statement audit.
To view the full report,
click on the following link:
www.epa.qov/oiq/reports/2005/
20050504-2005-1 -00081 .pdf

-------
,x^60Sr%

vC1
PRO^
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
May 4, 2005
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
Fiscal 2004 and 2003 Financial Statements for the Pesticides
Reregi strati on and Expedited Processing Fund
Report No. 2005-1-00081
FROM:
Paul C. Curtis
Director, Financial Statement Audits
TO:
Susan B. Hazen
Acting Assistant Administrator for Prevention,
Pesticides and Toxic Substances (7101M)
Charles E. Johnson
Chief Financial Officer (271 OA)
Attached is our audit report on the fiscal 2004 and 2003 financial statements for the Pesticides
Reregi strati on and Expedited Processing Fund (FIFRA).
We discussed our findings with your staff and issued a draft report. The comments we received
on the draft report are summarized in this final report. We appreciate your staffs assistance and
cooperation during the conduct of this audit.
In accordance with EPA Order 2750, we are requesting that the Acting Assistant Administrator
for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, as the primary action official, provide this
office with a written response to this report within 90 days of the final audit report date. For
corrective actions planned but not yet completed by the response date, refer to specific milestone
dates that will assist us in deciding whether to close this report in our audit tracking system.
This audit report contains findings that the Office of Inspector General (OIG) identified and
corrective actions the OIG recommends. This audit represents the opinion of the OIG and the
findings in this report do not necessarily represent the final Environmental Protection Agency

-------
(EPA) position. Final determinations on matters in this audit report will be made by EPA
managers in accordance with established EPA audit resolution procedures. We have no
objection to the further release of this report to the public.
If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please contact me at
(202) 566-2523, or Meg Bastin of my staff at (513) 487-2366.
Attachment

-------
Table of C
At a Glance
Inspector General's Report on the Fiscal 2004 and 2003
Financial Statements for the Pesticides Reregistration
and Expedited Processing Fund
Opinion on the FIFRA Fund Financial Statements		1
Evaluation of Internal Controls		2
Tests of Compliance with Laws and Regulations		4
Overview Section of the Financial Statements		4
Prior Audit Coverage		4
Recommendations		5
Agency Comment		5
Appendices
A Fiscal 2004 and 2003 FIFRA Financial Statements
B Distribution

-------
Inspector General's Report on the
Fiscal 2004 and 2003 Financial Statements for the
Pesticides Reregistration and Expedited Processing Fund
The Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:
We have audited the Pesticides Reregistration and Expedited Processing Fund (known as the
FIFRA fund) balance sheet as of September 30, 2004 and 2003, and the related statements of net
cost, changes in net position, budgetary resources, and financing for the year then ended. These
financial statements are the responsibility of Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's)
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
upon our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards; the standards
applicable to financial statements contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the
Comptroller General of the United States; and Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Bulletin No. 01-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. These standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatements. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also
includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly the assets, liabilities, net position,
budgetary resources, financing activities, and reconciliation of net costs to budgetary obligations
of the FIFRA fund, as of and for the years ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Throughout fiscal 2004, employees' payroll costs were transferred from the FIFRA fund to the
Environmental Programs and Management appropriation. These costs were transferred in order
to keep FIFRA's obligations and disbursements within budgetary and cash limits. As funds are
available, employees charged their time directly to FIFRA. As funds become limited, these
employees' payroll costs are transferred to the Environmental Programs and Management
appropriation. At the end of fiscal 2004, about 186 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) were charged
directly to the FIFRA fund. Due to year-end unfunded payroll liabilities associated with those
employees charging FIFRA, the FIFRA fund assets were not sufficient to cover the unfunded
liabilities of the fund. As a result, the FIFRA fund will either have to obtain additional funding
or such unfunded liabilities will have to be paid from other EPA appropriations.
1

-------
Evaluation of Internal Controls
As defined by OMB, internal control, as it relates to the financial statements, is a process,
affected by the agency's management and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable
assurance that the following objectives are met:
Reliability of financial reporting - Transactions are properly recorded, processed, and
summarized to permit the timely and reliable preparation of the financial statements in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; and assets are safeguarded
against loss from unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.
Reliability of performance reporting - Transactions and other data that support
reported performance measures are properly recorded, processed, and summarized to
permit the preparation of performance information in accordance with criteria stated by
management.
Compliance with applicable laws and regulations - Transactions are executed in
accordance with laws governing the use of budget authority and other laws and
regulations that could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements; and
any other laws, regulations, and Government-wide policies identified by OMB.
We did not test all internal controls relevant to operating objectives as broadly defined by the
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) of 1982, such as those controls relevant to
ensuring efficient operations. The objective of our audit was not to provide assurance on internal
controls and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion on internal controls. Our consideration
of the internal controls over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the
internal controls that might be reportable conditions or material weaknesses. Because of inherent
limitations in any internal control structure, losses, noncompliance, or misstatements could occur
and not be detected. Also, projecting our evaluation of internal controls to future periods is
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the
degree of compliance with such controls may deteriorate.
With respect to internal control related to performance measures presented in the Overview and
Analysis (which addresses requirements for a Management Discussion and Analysis), we
obtained an understanding of the design of significant internal controls relating to the existence
and completeness assertions, as required by OMB Bulletin No. 01-02. Our procedures were not
designed to provide assurance on internal control over reported performance measures and,
accordingly, we do not express an opinion on such controls.
2

-------
While we did not find evidence of material errors in the reporting under Reregi strati on Program
Performance Measure Two, we did find indications of possible internal control weaknesses. For
a number of the actions we sampled under this measure, either the documentation was not in the
product jacket at the time we reviewed the files, or the date of the action differed from the date
showing in the report from the Office of Pesticides Programs Information Network we were
given to support the numbers of actions reported under the performance measure. While the
scope of our audit did not include examination of the reasons for these deficiencies, we suggest
that the Office of Pesticides Programs review their internal controls related to this measure to
determine if improvements are needed.
Material Weaknesses
Material weaknesses as defined by OMB Bulletin No. 01-02 are situations where internal
controls do not reduce, to a relatively low level, the risk that errors, fraud, or noncompliance in
amounts material to the financial statements, including the performance measures reported for
the Fund, may occur and not be detected in a timely manner by employees in the normal course
of performing their assigned functions. We noted certain matters discussed below involving
operations that we consider to be reportable conditions, although none are believed to be material
weakness.
Reportable Conditions
OMB Bulletin No. 01-02 defines reportable conditions as matters that come to the auditor's
attention that, in the auditor's judgment, should be communicated because they represent
significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls that could adversely affect
the organization's ability to meet the objectives defined above. For fiscal 2004 we identified two
reportable conditions, as follows:
•	We could not assess the adequacy of the automated controls. As we have previously
reported, we could not assess the adequacy of the automated internal control structure as it
relates to automated input, processing, and output controls for the Integrated Financial
Management System. During past financial statement audits, we attempted to evaluate
controls without systems documentation, but these alternatives proved to be inefficient and
impractical We could not evaluate the reliability of these controls because existing
documentation is not detailed enough to develop a sufficient test plan.
•	We identified a weakness in the Agency's preparation and quality control of the Financial
Statements and footnotes. The Agency did not have established milestones to provide for
proper quality control over the financial statement preparation process. The draft statements
we received included incomplete line items, amounts that were misclassified, inconsistencies
among and within the Financial Statements and footnotes, inaccurate calculations, and
material misstatements. Additionally, the Agency double booked the payroll unfunded leave
liability, which would have materially misstated the financial statements if not caught by
OIG auditors.
3

-------
Comparison of EPA's FMFIA Report with Our Evaluation of Internal Controls
OMB Bulletin No. 01-02 requires us to compare material weaknesses disclosed during the audit
with those material weaknesses reported in the agency's FMFIA report that relate to the financial
statements and identify material weaknesses disclosed by audit that were not reported in the
agency's FMFIA report.
For reporting under FMFIA, material weaknesses are defined differently than they are defined
for financial statement audit purposes. OMB Circular A-123, Management Accountability and
Control, defines a material weakness as a deficiency that the agency head determines to be
significant enough to be reported outside the agency.
Our audit did not disclose any material weaknesses, nor were any reported by the Agency as part
of the Integrity Act process.
Tests of Compliance with Laws and Regulations
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from
material misstatement, we tested compliance with those laws and regulations that could either
materially affect the FIFRA financial statements, or that we considered significant to the audit.
The objective of our audit, including our tests of compliance with applicable laws and
regulations, was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions.
Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. However, we did not identify any non-
compliances that would result in a material misstatement to the audited financial statements.
Overview Section of the Financial Statements
Our audit work related to the information presented in Management's Overview and Analysis of
the Pesticides Program included comparing the overview information with information in EPA's
principal financial statements to ensure that it was consistent. In comparing the overview
information with information presented in EPA's principal financial statements, we did not
identify material inconsistencies between the information presented in the two documents.
Our audit work also included obtaining an understanding of the design of significant internal
controls relating to the existence and completeness assertions of the performance measures in the
Overview. Our procedures were not designed to provide assurance on internal control over
reported performance measures and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion on such controls.
We reviewed supporting documentation for each of the five performance measures listed in
Management's Overview and Analysis of the Pesticides Program, and did not note any
discrepancies.
Prior Audit Coverage
During the fiscal 2003 audit, we reported reportable conditions concerning the accuracy of the
performance measure outcomes disclosed in the overview section of the report. Also, the timing
4

-------
of the issuance of performance measure reports and the fiscal year did not coincide. Further, as a
result of EPA's transition to a new pesticides information system, the total number of
reregi strati on studies accomplished through the end of the fiscal year and disclosed in the report
did not agree with performance measure reports. The Office of Pesticides Programs agreed to
disclose the timing of all performance measures and also agreed to disclose the decrease in
number of studies received. The Agency revised the FIFRA financial statements and adequately
disclosed accurate performance measure data and reasons for the decrease in reregi strati on
studies.
Recommendations
We recommend that the Director, Reporting and Analysis Staff, Office of the Chief Financial
Officer:
1.	Ensure that products issued from the office, especially products that would go outside the
Agency, such as the Financial Statements (including the footnotes, supplemental
information, and overview), are properly reviewed prior to release or submittal for audit.
2.	Establish milestone due dates for the FIFRA 2005 financial statement audit.
Agency Comment
The Agency agreed with our findings and recommendations.
Paul C. Curtis
Director, Financial Statement Audits
Office of Inspector General
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 25, 2005
5

-------
Appendix A
FY 2004 and 2003 FIFRA REREGISTRA TION FUND
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
Produced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of the Chief Financial Officer

-------
Office of Financial Management
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview and Analysis of the Pesticide Program 		1
Principal Financial Statements		11

-------
OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS
OF THE PESTICIDE PROGRAM
Page 1
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE PESTICIDE PROGRAM
The Agency's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) was established pursuant to the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to protect public health and the
environment. The law requires the Agency to balance public health and environmental concerns
with the expected economic benefits derived from pesticides. The guiding principles of the
pesticide program are to reduce risks from pesticides in food, the workplace, and other exposure
pathways and to prevent pollution by encouraging the use of new and safer pesticides.
In accordance with FIFRA and the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the
pesticide program administers the Revolving Fund for Certification and Other Services
(Tolerance Fund) and the Pesticides Reregi strati on and Expedited Processing Fund (FIFRA
Fund). As of 1996, fees for both tolerance and reregi strati on are deposited to the FIFRA
account, which is available to the EPA without further appropriation.
Tolerance Program Description
As part of its authority to regulate pesticides, EPA is responsible for setting "tolerances."
If the pesticide is being considered for use on a food or feed crop or as a food or feed additive,
the applicant must petition EPA for establishment of a tolerance (or exemption from a tolerance)
under authority of the FFDCA. A tolerance is the maximum legal limit of a pesticide residue on
food commodities and animal feed. Tolerances are set at levels that ensure that the public is
protected from health risks posed by eating foods that have been treated with pesticides in
accordance with label directions.
In 1954, Congress authorized the collection of fees for the establishment of tolerances for
raw agricultural commodities (Section 408 of FFDCA). Congress, however, did not authorize
the collection of fees for food additive tolerances (Section 409 of FFDCA). EPA, therefore, does
not collect fees for food additive tolerances. The Agency also does not collect fees for Agency-
initiated actions such as the revocation of tolerances for previously canceled pesticides. Fees
collected for tolerances for raw agricultural commodities were deposited to the U.S. Treasury
General Fund until 1963 when Congress established the Tolerance Fund.
In 1996, pesticide reform legislation included provisions for additional fees to support
reregi strati on activities. Passage of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 requires
tolerances to be reassessed as part of the reregi strati on program. Effective January 1997, all fees
related to tolerance activities were deposited in the FIFRA Fund. With passage of the Pesticide
Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003, no additional tolerance petition fees will be
deposited to the FIFRA Fund through FY 2008.
Page 2
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Pesticide Reregistration Program Description
As part of its authority to regulate pesticides, EPA is responsible for re-registering
existing pesticides. The FIFRA legislation, requiring the registration of pesticide products, was
originally passed in 1947. Since then, health and environmental standards have become more
stringent and scientific analysis techniques much more precise and sophisticated. In the 1988
amendments to FIFRA (FIFRA '88), Congress mandated the accelerated reregistration of all
products registered prior to November 1, 1984. The amendments established a statutory goal of
completing reregistration eligibility decisions (REDs) by 1997. The legislation allows for
various time extensions which can extend the deadline by three years or more. The statutory
requirement for the completion of reregistration food-use (REDs) is 2006, in conjunction with
the new tolerance reassessment program. For the non-foods-use active ingredient REDs, the
current legal deadline under PRIA for completion of reregistration is October 3, 2008.
Congress authorized the collection of two kinds of fees to supplement appropriated funds
for the reregistration program: an annual maintenance fee and a one-time reregistration fee.
Maintenance fees are assessed on registrants of pesticide products and were structured to collect
approximately $14 million per year. Reregistration fees are assessed on the manufacturers of the
active ingredients in pesticide products and are based on the manufacturer's share of the market
for the active ingredient. In fiscal years 1992 through 1999, approximately 14% of the
maintenance fees collected, up to $2 million each year, were used for the expedited processing of
old chemical and amended registration applications. Fees are deposited into the FIFRA
Revolving Fund. By statute, excess monies in the FIFRA Fund may be invested. Waivers
and/or refunds are granted for minor use pesticides, antimicrobial pesticides, and small
businesses.
In 1996, pesticide reform legislation included provisions for additional fees to support
reregistration activities. Passage of the FQPA of 1996 implemented the following changes in the
Pesticide Reregistration Program: reauthorized collection of maintenance fees through 2001 to
complete the review of older pesticides to ensure they meet current standards (increased annual
fees from $14 million to $16 million per year for 1998, 1999, and 2000 only) and required all
tolerances (over 9,700) to be reassessed by 2006. EPA's 2002 appropriations bill extended
authority to collect maintenance fees by one year for the amount of $17 million and the FY 2003
appropriations extended the authority to collect fees again by one year in the amount of $21.5
million. Passage of PRIA in FY 2004 extended the authority to collect maintenance fees through
FY 2008 (with annual fee amounts at $26 million in FY 2004; $27 million in FY 2005-2006; $21
million in FY 2007; and $15 million in FY 2008).
The reregistration process is being conducted through reviews of groupings of similar
active ingredients called cases. There are five major phases of reregistration:
~ Phase 1 - Listing of Active Ingredients. EPA publishes lists of active ingredients and
asks registrants whether they intend to seek reregistration. (Completed in FY 1989)
Page 3
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
~	Phase 2 - Declaration of Intent and Identification of Studies. Registrants notify EPA if
they intend to reregister and identify missing studies. (Completed in FY 1990)
~	Phase 3 - Summarization of Studies. Registrants submit required existing studies.
(Completed in FY 1991)
~	Phase 4 - EPA Review and Data Call-Ins (DCIs). EPA reviews the studies, identifies and
"calls-in" missing studies by issuing a DCI. A "DCI" is a request to a pesticide registrant
for scientific data to assist the Agency in determining the pesticide's eligibility for
reregi strati on. (Completed in FY 1994)
~	Phase 5 - Reregi strati on Decisions. EPA reviews all studies and issues a Reregi strati on
Eligibility Decision (RED) for the active ingredient(s). A "RED" is a decision by the
Agency defining whether uses of a pesticide active ingredient are eligible or ineligible for
reregi strati on. The registrant complies with the RED by submitting product specific data
and new labels. EPA reregisters or cancels the product. Pesticide products are re-
registered, based on a RED, when it meets all label requirements. This normally takes 14
to 20 months after issuance of the RED.
Research Program Description
Pesticide research continues to focus on providing scientifically-valid, cost-effective
methods for evaluating risks associated with pesticide use, manufacture, and release into the
environment. Research efforts in FY 2004 focused on developing new and revised human health
effects test methods to improve EPA's understanding of the effects of pesticides on infants and
children (age-related differences and activity patterns) and other highly-exposed groups. EPA
also continued efforts to develop a systematic approach for determining the cumulative risk for a
given set of exposure conditions. This approach, starting with less complex paradigms (e.g., risk
from aggregate exposure to a single chemical or a class of pesticides with a common mode of
action) builds towards the more complex, including consideration of different temporal
dimensions of exposure.
Additionally, research addressed agricultural and residential exposure and effects, with
particular emphasis on children's health, including the special susceptibilities of infants and
children exposed to pesticides and other toxins. Results from this work will support human and
environmental risk assessments.
Page 4
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program Description
The Pesticide Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program focuses on pesticide
product and user compliance, including problems relating to pesticide worker safety protection,
ineffective antimicrobial products, food safety, adverse effects, and e-commerce. The
enforcement and compliance assurance program provides compliance assistance to the regulated
community through its National Agriculture Compliance Assistance Center, seminars, guidance
documents, brochures, and other forms of communication to ensure knowledge of and
compliance with environmental laws.
EPA's grant support to states' and tribes' pesticide programs emphasizes pesticide
worker protection standards, high risk pesticide activities including antimicrobials, pesticide
misuse in urban areas, and the misapplication of structural pesticides. In FY 2004, states
continued to conduct compliance monitoring inspections on core pesticide requirements.
EPA will continue its commitment to maintaining a strong compliance and enforcement
presence. Agency priorities for FY 2004 and FY 2005 include enforcement for products making
illegal public health claims, including unregistered and ineffective products, such as
inefficacious hospital disinfectants; enforcement of worker protection standards; compliance
monitoring and enforcement activities related to: 1) special action chemicals identified by the
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, 2) unregistered sources of pesticidal active
ingredients, and 3) illegal distribution, sale, and advertisement of pesticides and pesticidal
services via the Internet.
Highlights and Accomplishments
Tolerance Performance Measures
Tolerance fees collected in FY 2004 were approximately $0.14 million and obligations
were $0.6 million.
Measure: Tolerance re-evaluations.
Results: In FY 2004, EPA reassessed 467 tolerances and exemptions from tolerance. Of
these, 87 reassessments occurred through reregistration/REDs, 119 were obtained through
Tolerance Reassessment Decisions (TREDs), and 261 were from other sources. At the end of FY
2004, EPA had completed 7,093 tolerance reassessment decisions, addressing 73% of the 9,721
tolerances that require reassessment.
Reresistration (FIFRA) Financial Perspective
During FY 2004, the Agency's obligations charged against the FIFRA Fund for the cost
of the reregi strati on programs and other authorized pesticide programs were $24.7 million and
Page 5
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
187.9 workyears. Of these amounts, OPP obligated $22.8 million of this cost and funded the
187.9 workyears.
Appropriated funds are used in addition to FIFRA revolving funds. In FY 2004,
approximately $49.1 million in appropriated funds were obligated for reregi strati on program
activities. The unobligated balance in the Fund at the end of FY 2004 was $2.5 million.
The Fund has two types of receipts: fee collections and interest earned on investments.
Of the $26.2 million in FY 2004 receipts, approximately 99.7% were fee collections.
Reregistration Program (FIFRA) Performance Measures
The following measures support the program's strategic goals of Healthy Communities
and Ecosystems as contained in the FY 2004 President's budget.
Measure 1: Number of Reregistration Eligibility Documents (REDs) completed.
Results: In FY 2004, OPP completed decisions for 35 pesticides including 17 REDs and
18 TREDs. Of the 612 chemical cases (representing 3,822 chemical active ingredients), that
initially were subject to reregistration, 244 have completed REDs. An additional 231
reregistration cases were voluntarily canceled before EPA invested significant resources in
developing REDs. A total of475 reregistration cases (78%), therefore, had completed the
reregistration eligibility decision making process by the end of FY 2004, leaving 137 cases
(22%) awaiting such decisions.
Measure 2: Number of products reregistered, canceled, or amended.
Approximately 19,000 products are or eventually will be subject to product reregistration.
Many products, however, contain more than one active ingredient. Since products are
reassessed separately for each active ingredient, EPA will conduct approximately 38,000
product reviews.
Results: In FY 2004, 78 product reregistration actions1, 35 product amendment actions,
and 14 product cancellation actions were completed. Currently, a universe of approximately
10,401 products is undergoing or has completed product reregistration. The status of those
products at the end of FY 2004 was as follows: 427product registrations had been amended;
4,033 products were cancelled2; 30 products were sent for suspension; 4,141 products had
1 Product reregistrations include federally registered products and special local needs registrations issued
by states pursuant to Section 24(c) of FIFRA.
A product cancellation is reported as a reregistration decision when a voluntary cancellation request is
received, when the annual maintenance fee is not paid, or when a notice of intent to cancel due to
unreasonable adverse effects is issued. In the case of a voluntary cancellation request, the process of
finalizing the cancellation required by Section 6(f) of FIFRA may take about six months after receipt of
the request to complete.
Page 6
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
actions/decisions pending; and 1,770 products were reregistered. The Agency's goal in FY 2005
is to complete 450 product reregistration actions.
Measure 3: Progress in Reducing the Number of Unreviewed, Required
Reregistration Studies.
Results: EPA is making good progress in reviewing scientific studies submitted by
registrants in support of pesticides undergoing reregistration. 27,369 studies have been received
by the Agency through the reregistration program. Nearly 85% of these studies have been
reviewed or have been found to be extraneous. Approximately 15% of all studies are awaiting
review for future REDs to complete the reregistration program.
Measure 4: Number and Type of DCIs Issued to Support Product Reregistration by
Active Ingredient.
Results: The number and type of data requests or Data Call-In notices (DCIs) issued by EPA
under FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) to support product reregistration for pesticide active ingredients
included in FY 2004 REDs are shown in Table 1.
Page 7
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Table 1. Data Call-ins Issued to Support Product Reregistrationfor FY 2004 REDs
Case
No.
Case Name
Number of
Products
Covered by the
RED3
Number of
Product
Chemistry
Studies Required4
Number of Acute Toxicology Studies
Required5
Number of
Efficacy
Studies
Required
2030
Benfluralin
119
31
138 (15 batches/8 products not batched)
0
0012
Carboxin
44
31
186 (2 batches/29 products not batched)
0
2125
Cycloate
9
31
6 (1 Batch)
0
3955
Dihalodialkyldantions
106
34
Antimicrobial RED-Acute toxicity batching
not completed yet
AD to
provide
0003
Ethoxyquin
4
31
Acute Toxicity batching not completed yet
0
0017
MCPA
170
31
Acute Toxicity batching not completed yet
0
0249
Methoxychlor (voluntary
cancellation)
2
NA
NA
NA
0379
Napthalene acetic acid (NAA)
46
31
Acute Toxicity batching not completed yet
0
0183
Naptalam
1
31
6 (No Batch)
0
4069
Oleic Acid Sulfonates
1
34
6 (No Batch)
1
4074
Phenol and Salts
6
34
Antimicrobial RED-Acute toxicity batching
not completed yet
5
3122
PHMB
17
34
42 (3 batches/4 products not batched)
4
3113
Pine Oils
89
34
Antimicrobial RED-Acute toxicity batching
not completed yet
4
3126
Propylene/Dipropylene Gycol
14
34
Antimicrobial RED-Acute toxicity batching
not completed yet
5
3128
Sabadilla Alkaloids
1
31
6 (No Batch)
0
0122
Thiram
66
31
282 (5 batches/42 products not batched)
0
2480
Zinc Pyrithione
18
34
84 (3 batches/11 products not batched)
0

Total No. of Products
713



3
The number of registered products containing a pesticide active ingredient can change overtime. The
product total that appears in the RED document (counted when the RED is signed) may be different than
the number of products that EPA is tracking for product reregistration (counted later, when the RED is
issued). This table reflects the final number of products associated with each RED, as they are being
tracked for product reregistration.
4	This column shows the number of product chemistry studies that are required for each product covered
by the RED.
5	In an effort to reduce the time, resources, and number of animals needed to fulfill acute toxicity data
requirements, EPA "batches" products that can be considered similar from an acute toxicity standpoint.
For example, one batch could contain five products. In this instance, if six acute toxicology studies
usually were required per product, only six studies (rather than 30 studies) would be required for the
entire batch. Factors considered in the sorting process include each product's active and inert ingredients
(e.g., identity, percent composition, and biological activity), type of formulation (e.g., emulsifiable
concentrate, aerosol, wettable powder, granular, etc.), and labeling (e.g., signal word, use classification,
precautionary labeling, etc.). The Agency does not describe batched products as "substantially similar,"
because all products within a batch may not be considered chemically similar or have identical use
patterns. (Note: FIFRA Section 24(c) or Special Local Need (SLN) registrations are not included in acute
toxicity batchings because they are supported by a valid parent product (Section 3) registration.)
Page 8
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Measure 5: Future Schedule for Reregistrations.
Results: EPA is now conducting reregistration in conjunction with tolerance
reassessment under FQPA. That law requires the Agency to reassess all existing tolerances over
a ten year period to ensure consistency with the new safety standard, and to consider pesticides
that appear to pose the greatest risk first. The organophosphate (OP) pesticides thus have been
the focal point of EPA 's reregistration and tolerance reassessment programs for several years
(see List 1).
List 1. The Organophosphate Pesticides
Organophosphate Pesticides with Decisions Pending
Dichlorvos (DPVP) Dimethoate	Malathion
Organophosphate Pesticides with Individual Decisions Completed
Acephate
Dicrotophos
Methidathion
Pirimiphos methyl
Azinphos-methyl
Disulfoton
Methyl parathion
Profenofos
Bensulide
Ethion
Mevinphos
Propetamphos
Cadusafos
Ethoprop
Naled
Sulfotepp
Chlorethoxyfos
Ethyl Parathion
Oxydemeton-
Temephos


methyl

Chlorpyrifos
Fenamiphos
Phorate
Terbufos
Chlorpyrifos
Fenitrothion
Phosalone
Tetrachlorvinphos
methyl



Coumaphos
Fenthion
Phosmet
Tribufos (DEF)
Diazinon
Methamidophos
Phostebupirim
Trichlorfon
EPA currently is reviewing each of the OP pesticides with individual decisions pending,
and expects to complete risk assessments and interim risk management decisions for these three
pesticides in FY 2005.
List 2. Fiscal Year 2005 Candidates for Decisions - subject to change
FY 2005 RED, IRED, and TRED Candidate Pesticides
Page 9
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
RED Candidates
Phenylphenol and salts
Chlorosulfuron
Mancozeb
2, 4-D
Chronmated arsenicals
Maneb
(CCA)
2,4-DB
Coal tar creosote
Metiram
Ametryn
Dimethipin
Napropamide
Aquashade
Di methyl dithi ocarb am ate
salts
Nitrapyrin
Azadi oxabi cy cl o-octane
Or Ferbam (rest of case)
PCNB
Benzisothiazoline-3-one
Endothall
Pentachlorophenol
Benozoic acid
Ethofumesate
Phenmedipham
Chlorine dioxide
Fluometuron
Phytophtora palmivora
Choroneb
Inorganic chlorates
Pyrazon

Iodine
Sodium fluoride
IRED Candidates
Dichlorvos (DDVP) Dimethoate Malathion
TRED Candidates
Amitraz
Fluazifop-p-butyl
Methyl eugenol
Boric acid group
Flumiclorac-pentyl
Nicosulfuron
Cyhexatin
Imazethebenz
Putrescent whole egg solids
Ethephon
Maleic hydrazide
Sulfuric acid monourea


Tanol derivatives
Page 10
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page 11
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Financial Statements
Balance Sheet
Statement of Net Cost
Statement of Changes in Net Position
Statement of Budgetary Resources
Statement of Financing
Notes to Financial Statements
Note 1.	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Note 2.	Fund Balances with Treasury
Note 3.	Other Liabilities
Note 4.	Payroll and Benefits Payable
Note 5.	Income and Expenses from Other Appropriations
Note 6.	Exchange Revenues, Statement of Net Cost
Page 12
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA
Balance Sheet
As of September 30, 2004 and 2003
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2004	FY 2003
ASSETS
Intragovernmental
Fund Balance With Treasury (Note 2)	$ 4,881	$ 1,797
Investments 0	(3)
Other (Note 3)		620_ 	0_
Total Intragovernmental	$ 5,501	$ 1,794
Accounts Receivable, Net		1_ 	0
Total Assets	$ 	5,502 $ 	1,794
LIABILITIES
Intragovernmental
Accounts Payable & Accrued Liabilities	$ 115	$ 229
Other (Note 4)		195_ 	153
Total Intragovernmental	$ 310	$ 382
Accounts Payable & Accrued Liabilities	16	15
Payroll & Benefits Payable (Note 5)	3,348	3,292
Other (Note 4)		4,348		219
Total Liabilities	$ 	8,022 $ 	3,908
NET POSITION
Cumulative Results of Operations		(2,520)		(2,114)
Total Net Position		(2,520)		(2,114)
Total Liabilities and Net Position	$	5,502 $	1,794
Page 13
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA
Statement of Net Cost
For the Years Ended September 30, 2004 and 2003
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2004	FY 2003
COSTS
Intragovernmental
With the Public
Expenses from Other Appropriations (Note 6)
Total Costs
Less:
Earned Revenues, Federal (Note 7)
Earned Revenues, Non-Federal (Note 7)
Total Earned Revenues
NET COST OF OPERATIONS
$
6,061 $
7,491

18,260
17,835

40,895
41,578
$
65,216 $
66,904
$
72 $
46

22,145
22,792
$
22,217 $
22,838
$
42,999 $
44,066
Page 14
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA
Statement of Changes in Net Position
For the Years Ended September 30, 2004 and 2003
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2004	FY 2003
Net Position - Beginning of Period	$ (2,114)	$ (841)
Budgetary Financing Sources:
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 6)	40,895	41,578
Total Budgetary Financing Sources	$ 40,895	$ 41,578
Other Financing Sources:
Imputed Financing Sources	1,495	1,215
Other - Unfunded Annual Leave Transfer (Note 5) 	203		0
Total Other Financing Sources	$ 1,698	$ 1,215
Net Cost of Operations	(42,999)	(44,066)
Net Position - End of Period	$ (2,520)	$ (2,114)
Page 15
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA
Statement of Budgetary Resources
For the Years Ended September 30, 2004 and 2003
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2004	FY 2003
BUDGETARY RESOURCES
Unobligated Balances:
Beginning of Period	$	890	$	376
Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections:
Earned and Collected	22,220	22,838
Advance Received		4,129		216
Total Spending Authority from Collections	$	26,349	$	23,054
Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations		40		168
Total Budgetary Resources	$ 	27,279	$ 	23,598
STATUS OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES
Obligations Incurred:
Reimbursable	$	24,747	$	22,708
Unobligated Balances:
Apportioned		2,532		890
Total Status of Budgetary Resources	$ 	27,279	$ 	23,598
RELATIONSHIP OF OBLIGATIONS TO
OUTLAYS
Obligations Incurred, Net	$	(1,642)	$	(514)
Obligated Balances, Net - Beginning of Period	904	2,621
Undelivered Orders, Unpaid	(1,197)	149
Accounts Payable		(1,151)		(1,053)
Total Outlays	$ 	(3,086)	$ 	1,203
Disbursements	$	23,263	$	24,258
Collections	(26,349)	(23,055)
Net Outlays	$ 	(3,086)	$ 	1,203
Page 16
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Statement of Financing
FIFRA
For the Years Ended September 30, 2004 and 2003
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2004	FY 2003
RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES:
Budgetary Resources Obligated
Obligations Incurred
$ 24,747
$
22,708
Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting



Collections and Recoveries
(26,389)

(23,222)
Obligations, Net of Offsetting Collections
$ (1,642)
$
(514)
Other Resources



Imputed Financing Sources
$ 1,495
$
1,215
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 6)
40,895

41,578
Net Other Resources Used to Finance Activities
$ 42,390
$
42,793
Total Resources Used To Finance Activities
$ 40,748
$
42,279
RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ITEMS
NOT PART OF NET COST OF OPERATIONS
Change in Budgetary Resources Obligated for Goods	$ 	2,162	$	1,343
Total Resources Used to Finance Items Not
Part of the Net Cost of Operations	$ 	2,162	$ 	1,343
Total Resources Used to Finance the Net
Cost of Operations	$ 42,910	$ 43,622
COMPONENTS OF NET COST OF OPERATIONS
THAT WILL NOT REQUIRE OR GENERATE
RESOURCES IN THE CURRENT PERIOD
Components Requiring or Generating Resources in
Future Periods:
Increase in Annual Leave Liability (Note 5)
Total Components of Net Cost of Operations that
Requires or Generates Resources in the Future
Expenses Not Requiring Budgetary Resources
Net Cost of Operations
$ 	91_	$	444
$	91	$	444
	(2)_ 	0_
$ 42,999	$ 44,066
Page 17
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA
Notes to Financial Statements
(Dollars in Thousands)
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies:
A.	Basis of Presentation
These financial statements have been prepared to report the financial position and results of
operations of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the Reregi strati on and Expedited
Processing (FIFRA) Revolving Fund as required by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990.
The reports have been prepared from the books and records of EPA in accordance with "Form
and Content for Agency Financial Statements," specified by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in Bulletin 01-09 and EPA's accounting policies which are summarized in this
note. These statements are therefore different from the financial reports also prepared by EPA
pursuant to OMB directives that are used to monitor and control EPA's use of budgetary
resources.
B.	Reporting Entity
EPA was created in 1970 by executive reorganization from various components of other Federal
agencies in order to better marshal and coordinate Federal pollution control efforts. The Agency
is generally organized around the media and substances it regulates — air, water, land, hazardous
waste, pesticides and toxic substances.
FIFRA was authorized in 1988 by amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act. The 1988 amendments mandated the accelerated reregi strati on of all products
registered prior to November 1, 1984. Congress authorized the collection of fees to supplement
appropriations to fund re-registration and to fund expedited processing of pesticides. FIFRA also
includes provisions for the registration of new pesticides, monitoring the distribution and use of
pesticides, issuing civil or criminal penalties for violations, establishing cooperative agreements
with the states, and certifying training programs for users of restricted chemicals. Appropriated
funds, however, pay for these activities. The FIFRA Revolving Fund is accounted for under
Treasury symbol number 68X4310.
FIFRA may charge some administrative costs directly to the fund and charge the remainder of
the administrative costs to Agency wide appropriations. Costs funded by Agency wide
appropriations for FYS 2004 and for 2003 were $40,895 and $41,578 thousand respectively.
These amounts were included as Income from Other Appropriations on the Statements of
Changes in Net Position and Financing and as Expenses from Other Appropriations on the
Statement of Net Cost for FYS 2004 and 2003.
Page 18
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
C.	Budgets and Budgetary Accounting
Funding of the FIFRA Revolving Fund is provided by fees collected from industry to offset costs
incurred by EPA in carrying out these programs. Each year EPA submits an apportionment
request to OMB based on the anticipated collections of industry fees.
D.	Basis of Accounting
Transactions are recorded on an accrual accounting basis and a budgetary basis. Under the
accrual method, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when a
liability is incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary accounting
facilitates compliance with legal constraints and controls over the use of Federal funds. All
interfund balances and transactions have been eliminated.
E.	Revenues and Other Financing Sources
For FYS 2004 and 2003, FIFRA received funding from fees collected for registration, re-
registration and from interest collected on investments in U.S. Government securities. However,
after September 30, 2002 the Agency no longer has the authority to collect Reregi strati on
Maintenance Fees. For FYS 2004 and 2003 revenues were recognized from fee collections to
the extent that expenses are incurred during the fiscal year.
F.	Funds with the Treasury
FIFRA deposits receipts and processes disbursements through its operating account maintained
at the U.S. Department of Treasury. Cash funds in excess of immediate needs, are invested in
U.S. Government securities.
G.	Investments in U. S. Government Securities
Investments in U. S. Government securities are maintained by Treasury and are reported at
amortized cost net of unamortized discounts. Discounts are amortized over the term of the
investments and reported as interest income. FIFRA holds the investments to maturity, unless
needed to finance operations of the fund. No provision is made for unrealized gains or losses on
these securities because, in the majority of cases, they are held to maturity.
H.	Accounts Receivable and Interest Receivable
FIFRA receivables are mainly for interest receivable on investments.
Page 19
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
I. Liabilities
Liabilities represent the amount of monies or other resources that are likely to be paid by EPA as
the result of a transaction or event that has already occurred. However, no liability can be paid
by EPA without an appropriation or other collection of revenue for services provided. Liabilities
for which an appropriation has not been enacted are classified as unfunded liabilities and there is
no certainty that the appropriations will be enacted. For FIFRA, liabilities are liquidated from
fee receipts and interest earnings, since FIFRA receives no appropriation. Liabilities of EPA,
arising from other than contracts, can be abrogated by the Government acting in its sovereign
capacity.
J. Annual, Sick and Other Leave
Annual, sick and other leave is expensed as taken during the fiscal year. Annual and other leave
earned but not taken as of the end of the fiscal year is accrued as an unfunded liability. Accrued
unfunded annual leave is included in the Balance Sheet as a component of "Other Liabilities,
non-Federal."
K. Retirement Plan
EPA's employees participate in either the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) or the
Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). The Agency makes contributions to the
retirement plans equal to 8.51% and 10.7% of base pay to CSRS and FERS, respectively.
On January 1, 1987, the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) went into effect pursuant
to Public Law 99-335. Most employees hired after December 31, 1983, are automatically
covered by FERS and Social Security. Employees hired prior to January 1, 1984, were allowed
to either join FERS and Social Security or remain in CSRS. A primary feature of FERS is that it
offers a savings plan to EPA employees which automatically contributes 1 percent of pay and
matches any employee contribution up to an additional 4 percent of pay. For most employees
hired after December 31, 1983, EPA also contributes the employer's matching share for Social
Security.
With the issuance of "Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government" (SFFAS-5),
accounting and reporting standards were established for liabilities relating to the Federal
employee benefit programs (Retirement, Health Benefits and Life Insurance). SFFAS-5 requires
employing agencies to recognize the cost of pensions and other retirement benefits during their
employees' active years of service. SFFAS-5 requires that the Office of Personnel Management,
as administrator of the CSRS, the FERS, the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and
the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Program, provide EPA with the 'cost factors' to
compute EPA's liability for each program.
Page 20
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Note 2. Fund Balances with Treasury:
FY 2004	FY 2003
Revolving Funds:	Entity Assets	$ 4.881	$ 1.797
Non-Entity Assets $ 0	$ 0
Note 3. Other Assets —Advances to Working Capital Fund
FIFRA advances funds to the EPA's Working Capital Fund to pay for computer, postage, and
other administrative support services. As of September 30, 2004 and 2003, funds advanced that
will be applied to future costs as incurred were $620,000 and $0, respectively.
Note 4. Other Liabilities:
For FY 2004, the Payroll and Benefits Payable, non-Federal, are now presented on a separate
line of the Balance Sheet and in a separate footnote (see Note 4 below).
FY 2004	FY 2003
Other Intragovernmental Liabilities - Covered by Budgetary Resources
Employer Contributions - Payroll	$	195	_$	153
Total	$	195	$	153
Other Non-Federal Liabilities - Covered by Budgetary Resources
Advances to non-Federal Entities	$ 4.348	$ 219
Note 5. Payroll and Benefits Payable, non-Federal:
FY 2004	FY 2003
Covered by Budgetary Resources
Accrued Payroll Payable to Employees	$ 540	$	457
Withholdings Payable	413	333
Thrift Savings Plan Benefits Payable		28	$	23
Total	$ 981	$	813
Page 21
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
FY 2004	FY 2003
Not Covered by Budgetary Resources
Unfunded Annual Leave Liability -	$ 2,479	$	2,035
Beginning of the Year
Amounts Transferred to PRIA (a)	(203)	0
Unfunded Annual Leave Expense (b)		91	$	444
Unfunded Annual Leave Liability - End
of the Year	$ 2,367	$	2,479
(a)	In FY 2004, certain employees were transferred to the new PRIA fund, the unfunded
leave liability associated with those employees was approximately $203 thousand.
(b)	The unfunded annual leave expenses for FYs 2004 and 2003 were $91 thousand and $444
thousand respectively. Such amounts represent the costs associated with the change in
unfunded leave balances of FIFRA employees as of 9/30/2004 and 9/30/2003. These
amounts were also reported in the Statement of Financing under the section "Components
Requiring or Generating Resources in Future Periods".
At various periods throughout FYS 2004 and 2003, employees with their associated payroll costs
were transferred from the FIFRA fund to the Environmental Programs and Management (EPM)
appropriation. (See graph in Note 5 below showing trend of hours charged per month to the
FIFRA fund for FYS 2004 and 2003.) These employees were transferred in order to keep
FIFRA's obligations and disbursements within budgetary and cash limits. When resources
became available, the employees charging to FIFRA increased in order to utilize resources as
much as possible. The Agency expects that the practice of transferring employees when
FIFRA's resources are low, and restoring employees when funds become available, will continue
throughout FY 2004 and probably beyond that period.
This process has led to variations between the year-end liabilities of FYS 2004 and 2003. The
liabilities covered by budgetary resources (both intragovernmental and non-Federal) represent
unpaid payroll and benefits at year-end. At the end of FY 2004, about 321 employees were
charging to FIFRA. As of September 30, 2004, these liabilities were $195 thousand and $981
thousand for employer contributions and accrued funded payroll and benefits, as compared to FY
2003's balances of $153 thousand and $813 thousand respectively.
In contrast, the unfunded annual leave liability is a longer term liability than the funded
liabilities. At various periods throughout FYS 2004 and 2003, approximately 187 employees in
total have been under FIFRA's accountability. Therefore both the September 30, 2004 and 2003
liability balances for unfunded annual leave were accrued to cover these 187 employees for a
total of $2,367 thousand and $2,479 thousand, respectively.
Page 22
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Note 6. Income and Expenses front Other Appropriations:
The Statement of Net Cost reports program costs that include the full costs of the program
outputs and consist of the direct costs and all other costs that can be directly traced, assigned on a
cause and effect basis, or reasonably allocated to program outputs.
During FYS 2004 and 2003, EPA had two appropriations which funded a variety of
programmatic and non-programmatic activities across the Agency, subject to statutory
requirements. The EPM appropriation was created to fund personnel compensation and benefits,
travel, procurement, and contract activities. Transfers of employees from FIFRA to EPM at
various times during these years (see Note 4 above) resulted in an increase in payroll expenses in
EPM, and these costs financed by EPM are reflected as an increase in the Expenses from Other
Appropriations on the Statement of Net Cost. The increased financing from EPM is reported on
the Statement of Changes in Net Position as Income from Other Appropriations.
In terms of hours charged to FIFRA each month, the transfers of employees and their associated
costs during FYS 2004 and 2003 are shown below. Note that a decrease in hours charged to
FIFRA normally signifies an increase in EPM's payroll costs, and vice versa. In addition, the
PRIA fund was separated from FIFRA starting with FY 2004 and has its own set of financial
statements.
FIFRA Payroll Hours Per Month
12
3
O
X
a)
n
E
3

60,000

50,000
T3
a)
40,000
O)
i_
(0
30,000
-C
O
20,000

10,000
0
o
O
>
o
c
=3
—)
=3
—)
CD CL
< CO
- FY04 Hours
¦ ¦ FY03 Hours
Months
Page 23
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
All of the expenses from EPM were distributed among EPA's two Reporting Entities: Superfund
and All Other (includes FIFRA). This distribution is calculated using a combination of specific
identification of expenses to Reporting Entities, and a weighted average that distributes expenses
proportionately to total programmatic expenses. As illustrated below, this estimate does not
impact the FIFRA's Net Position.
Income from Other Expenses from	Net
Appropriations Other	Effect
Appropriations
FY 2004 $40.895 $40.895	££
FY 2003 $41.578 $41.578	$_0
Note 7. Exchange Revenues, Statement of Net Cost
For FY 2004, the exchange revenues reported on the Statement of Net Cost are separated into
Federal and non-Federal portions.
Page 24
EPA's FY 2004 and 2003 Annual FIFRA Financial Statements

-------
Appendix B
Distribution
Office of the Administrator
Associate Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Agency Followup Official (the CFO)
Deputy Chief Financial Officer
General Counsel
Agency Followup Coordinator
Director, Office of Pesticides Programs
Deputy Director, Office of Pesticides Programs
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division
Director, Special Review and Reregi strati on Division
Director, Registration Division
Director, Antimicrobials Division
Director, Office of Financial Management
Director, Information Resources and Services Division
Director, Office of Financial Services
Director, Reporting and Analysis Staff
Director, Financial Policy and Planning Staff
Audit Followup Coordinator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Audit Followup Coordinator, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Inspector General

-------