U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Audit Report
• A v
I®.1
O
Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009
Financial Statements for the
Pesticide Registration Fund
Report No. 11-1-0157
March 10, 2011
-------
Report Contributors: Paul Curtis
Robert Smith
Bill Samuel
Catherine Allen
Sabrina Berry
Guillermo Mejia
Javier Negron
Demetrios Papakonstantinou
Myka Sparrow
Lynda Taylor
Abbreviations
CSRS
Civil Service Retirement System
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FERS
Federal Employees Retirement System
FMFIA
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act
FY
Fiscal year
OCFO
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
OIG
Office of Inspector General
OMB
Office of Management and Budget
OPM
Office of Personnel Management
PRIA
Pesticide Registration Improvement Act
-------
<
j- vyy T
vI7
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Inspector General
At a Glance
11-1-0157
March 10, 2011
Why We Did This Audit
The Pesticide Registration
Improvement Act (PRIA)
requires that we perform an
annual audit of the Pesticide
Registration Fund (known as
the PRIA Fund) financial
statements.
Background
To expedite the registration of
certain pesticides, Congress
authorized the U.S.
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to assess and
collect pesticide registration
fees. The fees collected are
deposited into the PRIA Fund.
The Agency is required to
prepare financial statements
that present financial
information about the PRIA
Fund. PRIA also requires the
establishment of decision time
review periods for pesticide
registration actions, and
requires the Office of Inspector
General to perform an analysis
of the Agency's compliance
with those review periods.
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009 Financial Statements
for the Pesticide Registration Fund
Opinion
We rendered an unqualified, or clean, opinion on EPA's Pesticide Registration
Fund financial statements for fiscal years 2010 and 2009, meaning that they were
fairly presented and free of material misstatement.
Internal Control Significant Deficiency Noted
We noted one significant deficiency in internal controls. EPA misapplied federal
retirement benefit cost factors in calculating fiscal year 2010 imputed cost related
to the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement
System. Imputed costs are costs that are not fully reimbursed. This significant
deficiency resulted in an understatement of $120,422. The Agency has corrected
fiscal year 2010 imputed costs in the PRIA Fund financial statements.
Compliance with Decision Time Review Periods
The Agency was in substantial compliance with the statutory decision time
frames.
Agency Comments and Office of Inspector General Evaluation
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention concurred with our general conclusions that the financial
statements are fairly presented and free of material misstatements.
For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional, Public Affairs
and Management at
(202) 566-2391.
The full report is at:
www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2011/
20110310-11-1-0157.pdf
-------
^tDsrx
• Q v
i S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
% VK# * WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
*L pro^*-
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
March 10, 2011
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009 Financial Statements for the
Pesticide Registration Fund
Report No. 11-1-0157
FROM: Arthur A. Elkins, Jr.
Inspector General
TO: Steve Owens
Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Barbara Bennett
Chief Financial Officer
This is our report on the audit of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Fiscal
Year 2010 and 2009 Financial Statements for the Pesticide Registration Fund, conducted by the
EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG). This report represents the opinion of the OIG and does
not necessarily represent the final EPA position. Final determination on matters in this report
will be made by EPA managers in accordance with established audit resolution procedures.
The estimated direct labor and travel costs for this report are $83,785.
Action Required
Because this report contains no recommendations, you are not required to respond to this report.
We have no objections to the further release of this report to the public. This report will be
available at http://www.epa.gov/oig.
If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please contact Melissa Heist at
202-566-0899 or Heist.Melissa@epa.gov. Paul Curtis at (202) 566-2523 or
Curtis.Paul@epa.gov. or Robert Smith at (202) 566-2531 or Smith.RobertL@epa.gov.
-------
Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009 Financial Statements
for the Pesticide Registration Fund
11-1-0157
Table of C
Inspector General's Report on the Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009
Financial Statements for the Pesticide Registration Fund
Opinion on the PRIA Fund Financial Statements 1
Evaluation of Internal Controls 1
Tests of Compliance With Laws and Regulations 3
Management's Discussion and Analysis Section of the Financial Statements 3
Prior Audit Coverage 4
Noteworthy Achievements 4
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation 4
Attachments
1 Significant Deficiency 5
Incorrect Cost Factors Were Used to Compute Imputed Costs 6
2 Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits 7
Appendices
A Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009 PRIA Financial Statements
B Distribution
-------
Inspector General's Report on the
Fiscal Year 2010 and 2009 Financial Statements
for the Pesticide Registration Fund
The Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
We have audited the Pesticide Registration Fund (known as the PRIA Fund)
balance sheet as of September 30, 2010, and 2009, and the related statements of
net cost, changes in net position, and budgetary resources for the years then
ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) 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 government
auditing standards; the standards applicable to financial statements contained in
Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United
States; and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 07-04, Audit
Requirements for Federal Financial Statements, as Amended. These standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance as to
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, including the accompanying notes,
present fairly, in all material respects, the assets, liabilities, net position, net cost,
changes in net position, and budgetary resources of the PRIA Fund, as of and for
the years ended September 30, 2010, and 2009, in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
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 preparation of the financial statements in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; and assets are
safeguarded against loss from unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.
11-1-0157
1
-------
Compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and government-wide policies—
Transactions are executed in accordance with laws governing the use of budget
authority, government-wide policies, laws identified by OMB, and other laws and
regulations that could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements.
In planning and performing our audit, we considered EPA's internal controls over
Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) financial reporting by obtaining an
understanding of the Agency's internal controls, determining whether internal
controls have been placed in operation, assessing control risk, and performing tests
of controls. We did this as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the
purpose of expressing an opinion on the financial statements and to comply with
OMB audit guidance, not to express an opinion on internal control. Accordingly,
we do not express an opinion on internal control over financial reporting. We
limited our internal control testing to those controls necessary to achieve the
objectives described in OMB Bulletin No. 07-04, Audit Requirements for Federal
Financial Statements, as Amended. We did not test all internal controls relevant to
operating objectives as broadly defined by the Federal Managers' Financial
Integrity Act (FMFIA), 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 control over financial reporting that
might be significant deficiencies. Under standards issued by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, a significant deficiency is a deficiency,
or combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a
material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with
governance. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies,
in internal controls, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material
misstatement of the entity's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected
and corrected on a timely basis. Because of inherent limitations in any internal
controls, misstatements, losses, or noncompliance may nevertheless occur and not
be detected. We noted a certain matter involving the internal controls and its
operations that we considered to be a significant deficiency. We do not consider
this matter to be a material weakness.
Significant Deficiency: Incorrect Cost Factors Were Used to Compute
Imputed Costs
EPA misapplied federal retirement benefit cost factors in calculating fiscal year
(FY) 2010 imputed cost related to the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS)
and the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). In August 2010, the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued Benefits Administration Letter,
Number: 10-306, which provided FY 2010 retirement cost factors that should be
applied in FY 2010 year-end financial reporting. EPA did not exercise due care in
computing FY 2010 imputed costs and inadvertently used the FY 2009 retirement
11-1-0157
2
-------
cost factors. This error resulted in a significant understatement for the PRIA Fund
in the amount of $120,422. After we brought the issue to the attention of the
Office of the Chief Financial Officer, that office made the appropriate adjustment
for the FY 2010 cost factors.
Comparison of EPA's FMFIA Report with Our Evaluation of Internal
Controls
OMB Bulletin No. 07-04, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements,
as Amended, 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
the audit that were not reported in the Agency's FMFIA report.
For financial statement audit and financial reporting purposes, OMB defines a
material weakness in internal control as a deficiency or combination of
deficiencies in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented or detected
and corrected on a timely basis. The Agency did not report, and our audit did not
detect, any material weaknesses for FY 2010 impacting the PRIA Fund.
Tests of Compliance With Laws and Regulations
In accordance with PRIA, the Administrator is required to publish a schedule of
decision time review periods for pesticide registration actions and corresponding
registration fees in the Federal Register. Decision time review periods are
specified time limits for the Agency to grant or deny pesticide registrations. PRIA
also requires the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to perform an analysis of the
Agency's compliance with decision time review periods. The Agency was in
substantial compliance with the statutory decision time frames.
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance as to whether the financial statements
are free of material misstatement, we tested compliance with those laws and
regulations that could either materially affect the PRIA financial statements, or
that we considered significant to the audit. The objective of our audit, including
our tests of compliance with applicable laws and regulations, was not to provide
an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. Accordingly, we do not
express such an opinion. We did not identify any noncompliances that would
result in a material misstatement to the audited financial statements.
Management's Discussion and Analysis Section of the
Financial Statements
Our audit work related to the information presented in the Management's
Discussion and Analysis of the Pesticide Program included comparing the
11-1-0157
3
-------
overview information with information in the principal financial statements for
consistency. We did not identify material inconsistencies between the information
presented in the two documents.
In FY 2009, we did not identify any significant deficiencies affecting the PRIA
Fund. During previous financial or financial-related audits, we reported a
significant deficiency because we could not assess the adequacy of Integrated
Financial Management System automated controls.
EPA has taken additional steps to correct the significant deficiency related to its
financial system by undertaking a project to replace its core financial application.
The new EPA Financial System is anticipated to go live in October 2012. We will
continue to report a significant deficiency concerning our inability to test
application controls due to insufficient system documentation until the new
system is implemented. (Audit of EPA's Fiscal 2010 and 2009 Consolidated
Financial Statements, Report No. 11-1-0015, issued November 15, 2010)
The Office of Pesticide Programs has done a commendable job in complying with
statutory decision time review periods for pesticide registration actions. During
our sample testing, we found that the Agency had completed the PRIA decisions
due during FY 2010 within the statutory time frames.
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention concurred with our general conclusions that the financial
statements are fairly presented and free of material misstatements. Their response
was submitted in an e-mail and is not included as an attachment to this report.
Paul C. Curtis
Director, Financial Statement Audits
Office of Inspector General
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
March xx, 2011
Prior Audit Coverage
Noteworthy Achievements
11-1-0157
4
-------
Attachment 1
Significant Deficiency
Table of Contents
1 - Incorrect Cost Factors Were Used to Compute Imputed Costs 6
11-1-0157 5
-------
Incorrect Cost Factors Were Used to Compute Imputed Costs
EPA misapplied federal retirement benefit cost factors in calculating FY 2010
imputed cost related to CSRS and FERS. In August 2010, OPM issued Benefits
Administration Letter, Number: 10-306, which provided FY 2010 retirement cost
factors that should be applied in FY 2010 year-end financial reporting. EPA did
not exercise due care in computing FY 2010 imputed costs and inadvertently used
the FY 2009 retirement cost factors. This error resulted in a significant
understatement for the PRIA Fund in the amount of $120,422.
Imputed costs related to pensions are the difference between pension service cost
and the employees' and federal pension contributions. The pension service cost is
determined by multiplying the basic pay paid to employees for each CSRS and
FERS category by the applicable cost factors. The FY 2010 cost factor for most
CSRS-covered employees was 30.1 percent and for most FERS-covered
employees was 13.8 percent. For FY 2009, these amounts were 25.8 percent and
12.3 percent, respectively.
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) has quality control procedures
in place that should have prevented this error; however, in this instance, the
control procedures were not effective. We identified this discrepancy during our
audit of EPA's FY 2010 financial statements and informed OCFO of the error in
November 2010. OCFO did not consider the impact of this error before issuing
the draft PRIA financial statements. After we brought this issue to the attention of
OCFO, that office made the appropriate adjustment for the FY 2010 cost factors.
Accordingly, we have no recommendations.
11-1-0157
6
-------
Attachment 2
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS
POTENTIAL MONETARY
BENEFITS (In $000s)
Rec.
No.
Page
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
Planned
Completion
Date
No recommendations
Claimed
Amount
Agreed To
Amount
11-1-0157
7
-------
Appendix A
FYs 2010 and 2009 PESTICIDE REGISTRATION FUND
(PRIA)
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
11-1-0157
Produced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Office of Financial Management
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Management's Discussion and Analysis 1
Principal Financial Statements 7
11-1-0157 EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements i
-------
Management's Discussion and Analysis
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
1
-------
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
The Agency's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) was established to administer 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.
With passage of the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003, the
pesticide program now administers the Pesticide Registration Fund. PRIA authorizes the
collection of new fees for pesticide registrations. Registration service fees are deposited into the
Registration Fund and made available for obligation to the extent provided in appropriation Acts,
and are available without fiscal year limitation.
Pesticide Registration
Under the authority of FIFRA and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), no person or State can distribute or sell
any pesticide that is not registered with the Agency. The pesticide registration program works to
decrease the risk to the public from pesticide use through the regulatory review of new
pesticides. In 2004, Congress passed PRIA, with deadlines for completion of certain registration
actions. As part of the registration program, EPA expedites the registration of reduced-risk
pesticide uses, which are generally presumed to pose lower risks to consumers, workers,
groundwater, and/or wildlife. These accelerated pesticide reviews provide an incentive for
industry to develop, register, and use lower risk pesticides. Additionally, the availability of these
reduced-risk pesticides provides alternatives to older, potentially more harmful products
currently on the market.
Biological agents are potential weapons that could be exploited by terrorists against the
United States. EPA's pesticides antimicrobial program is working to help address this threat.
Antimicrobials play an important role in public health and safety. EPA is conducting
comprehensive scientific assessments and developing test protocols to determine the safety and
efficacy of products used against chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, and
registering products as necessary. EPA is also developing a timeline for prioritizing and
implementing the tests. In addition, the Section 18 program provides emergency exemption to
any part of FIFRA. This authority is typically used by States on an emergency basis. EPA has
recently used this authority to help with homeland security. Section 18 exemptions have been
authorized to help with anthrax and soybean rust.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
2
-------
PRIA established registration service fees for certain antimicrobials, biopesticides and
conventional pesticides registration actions. The category of action, the amount of the
registration service fee, and the corresponding decision review periods by year are prescribed in
the statute. The goal is to create a more predictable evaluation process for affected pesticide
decisions, and couple the collection of individual fees with specific decision review periods. The
legislation also promotes shorter decision review periods for reduced-risk applications. PRIA
became effective on March 23, 2004, and the collection of registration fees were authorized
through FY 2008. PRIA was reauthorized with passage of the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Renewal Act (commonly referred to as PRIA 2) on October 9, 2007. PRIA 2
became effective retroactive to October 1, 2007, and the collection of registration fees are now
authorized through FY 2012. In order to help ensure a smooth transition (if PRIA 2 is not re-
authorized), PRIA 2 reduces the registration service fees by 40 percent in FY 2013 and then by
70 percent in FY 2014. For any application received after September 30, 2012, but before
September 30, 2014, the reduced registration service fee applies, while the decision review
periods do not.
In order for a pending or a new application covered by PRIA to be deemed complete and
subject to the decision review periods, a registrant is required to pay the applicable fee or receive
a waiver from the fees1. For most applications, the decision review period starts 21 days after
submission of the application - provided that the fee has been paid, fee waiver granted or in the
case of a 75% or 50% fee waiver under PRIA 2, the fee has been paid and waiver granted. The
legislation provides fee waivers for certain categories of small businesses, and minor uses2.
Exemptions from the requirement to pay a registration service fee is provided under PRIA 2 for
applications solely associated with IR-4 petitions3. Applications from federal and state agencies
are also exempt from registration service fees. If the registrant requests a waiver or reduction of
the fee, the decision review period will begin when the Agency grants such request or in the case
of small business fee waivers, no more than 60 days after receipt of the waiver application. If it
is determined that a fee is required and thus the waiver is not granted, the decision review period
starts after the fee is collected.
Applications received prior to October 1, 2007 are covered by PRIA 1. Applications
received in FY08 are covered by PRIA 2 and PRIA 2 contains the same audit provision as PRIA
1. PRIA 2 imposed minimum payment requirements; requires the EPA to reject an application
1 Out of approximately 9949 completed PRIA actions since the start of PRIA, more than 99%
were completed on or before the PRIA/PRIA 2 due date.
2 Minor use pesticides are those that produce relatively little revenue for their manufacturers, for a variety of
reasons. They may be registered for a seldom seen pest, or for a crop that is not grown by a large number of
producers. However, minor crops include some high revenue fruit, vegetable, and ornamental crops.
3 The IR-4 (Interregional Research Project No.4) program is involved in making sure that
pesticides are registered for use on minor crops. IR-4 helps by conducting research on minor use
pesticides, pesticides that would not otherwise be profitable to manufacture.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
3
-------
for an unpaid fee; provides the ability to reject an application if it fails an initial content screen
and retain a portion of the fee; increased the fee categories or types of applications covered by
PRIA from 90 to 140; allows the use of investment income; eliminated the 100% fee waiver for
small businesses; and increased the amount to support worker protection activities.
Research Program Description
EPA's pesticides and toxics research program continues to examine risks resulting from
exposure to pesticides and toxic chemicals. The research is designed to support the Agency's
efforts to reduce current and future risks to the environment and to humans by preventing and/or
controlling the production of new chemicals and products of biotechnology that pose
unreasonable risk, as well as assessing and reducing the risks of chemicals and products of
biotechnology already in commerce. The research program's major goals are: (1) to provide
predictive tools to prioritize testing requirements; enhance interpretation of data to improve
human health and ecological risk assessments; and inform decision-making regarding high
priority pesticides and toxic substances; (2) to develop probabilistic risk assessments to protect
natural populations of birds, fish, other wildlife, and non-target plants; and (3) to provide the
tools necessary to make decisions related to products of biotechnology.
In providing research on methods, models, and data to support decision-making regarding
specific individual or classes of pesticides and toxic substances that are of high priority, the
program is developing:
• Predictive biomarkers, quantitative structure activity relationships, and alternative test
methods for prioritizing and screening chemicals for a number of adverse effects (e.g.,
neurotoxicity, reproductive toxicity) that will lead to a reduction in and more efficient use
of whole animals in toxicity testing; and
• Data and protocols on the impact of waste water treatment technologies on pesticides and
their products of transformation.
To support the development of probabilistic risk assessments to protect endangered
populations of birds, fish, other wildlife, and non-target plants from pesticides while making sure
farmers and communities have the pest control tools they need, this program has four key
research components:
• Extrapolation among wildlife species and exposure scenarios of concern;
• Population biology to improve population dynamics in spatially-explicit habitats;
• Models for assessing the relative risk of chemical and non-chemical stressors; and
• Models to define geographical regional/spatial scales for risk assessment.
Methods for characterization of population-level risks of toxic substances to aquatic life and
wildlife also are being developed as part of the Agency's long-term goal of developing
scientifically valid approaches for assessing spatially-explicit, population-level risks to wildlife
populations and non-target plants and plant communities from pesticides, toxic chemicals and
multiple stressors while advancing the development of probabilistic risk assessment.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
4
-------
Additionally, research to support decision-making related to products of biotechnology
includes:
• Development of methods to assess the potential allergenicity of genetically engineered
plants.
• Characterization of the environmental impact of genetically engineered plants and
developing methods to reduce them.
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program Description
The Pesticide Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program focuses on pesticide
product and user compliance. These include problems relating to pesticide worker safety,
certification and training of applicators, ineffective antimicrobial products, food safety, adverse
effects, risks of pesticides to endangered species, pesticide containers and containment facilities,
and e-commerce and misuse. The enforcement and compliance assurance program provides
compliance assistance to the regulated community through its National Agriculture Compliance
Assistance Center, seminars, guidance documents, brochures, and other forms of communication
to ensure knowledge of and compliance with environmental laws.
EPA's grant support to states' and tribes' pesticide programs emphasizes its commitment
to maintaining a strong compliance and enforcement presence. Agency Cooperative Agreement
priorities for FY2008 - FY2010 include the enforcement of worker protection standards;
compliance monitoring and enforcement activities related to the newly promulgated pesticide
container and containment rules, and program performance reporting. Core program activities
include inspections of producing establishments; dealers/distributors/retailers; e-commerce;
imports and exports, and pesticide misuse. Additionally, through the Cooperative Agreement
resources we support inspector training and training for state/tribal senior managers, scientists,
and supervisors.
Highlights and Accomplishments
Registration Financial Perspective
During FY 2010, the Agency's obligations charged against the Pesticide Registration
Fund for the cost of registration were $18.1 million and 69.2 workyears (all obligated by OPP).
Appropriated funds are used in addition to Registration funds. In FY 2010, the enacted
operating plan included approximately $39.1 million in appropriated funds for registration
activities. The unobligated balance in the Fund at the end of FY 2010 was $7.4 million.
The Fund has two types of receipts: fee collections and interest earned on investments.
Of the $18.6 million in FY 2010 receipts, more than 99.9% were fee collections.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
5
-------
Registration Program Performance Measures
The following measures support the program's strategic goals of Healthy Communities and
Ecosystems as contained in the FY 2010 President's budget.
Measure 1: Number of new active ingredients registered.
Results: In FY 2010, EPA registered 22 new active ingredients, of which 17 are
biopesticides, and 4 are conventional pesticides with domestic uses. This measure includes both
reduced-risk and non-reduced-risk pesticides.
Measure 2: Progress in Registering Reduced-risk Pesticides.
Results: In FY 2010, EPA registered 18 reduced-risk new active ingredients, of which
17 were biological pesticides and 1 was a conventional pesticide. Biological pesticides are
certain types of pesticides derivedfrom such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and
certain minerals. They are usually less toxic and are typically considered safer pesticides than
the traditional conventional chemicals; therefore, the 17 biopesticides new active ingredients are
counted as reduced-risk pesticides. Conventional "reduced risk" pesticides have one or more of
the following advantages over currently registered pesticides: low impact on human health, low
toxicity to non-target organisms, low potential for groundwater contamination, lower use rates,
low pest resistance potential, and compatibility with integrated pest management strategies.
Measure 3: Number of New Food Uses Registered.
Results: EPA registered 242 new food uses for previously registered active ingredients.
Of these new uses, 233 were for conventional pesticides, 2 were for antimicrobial pesticides, and
7 were for biopesticides.
Measure 4: Progress in Registering Reduced-risk New Uses.
Results: Included in the new uses registered are 25 reduced-risk.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
6
-------
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
7
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Financial Statements
Balance Sheet 9
Statement of Net Cost 10
Statement of Changes in Net Position 11
Statement of Budgetary Resources 12
Notes to Financial Statements
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies 13
Note 2. Fund Balance with Treasury 16
Note 3. Other Assets 16
Note 4. General Property, Plant and Equipment 16
Note 5. Other Liabilities 17
Note 6. Payroll and Benefits Payable 18
Note 7. Income and Expenses from Other Appropriations 18
Note 8. Exchange Revenues, Statement of Net Cost 20
Note 9. Intragovernmental Costs and Exchange Revenue 20
Note 10. Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to Budget (formerly the
Statement of Financing) 21
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
8
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Balance Sheet
For the Years Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009
(Dollars in
Thousands)
FY2010
FY2009
ASSETS
Intragovernmental:
Fund Balance With Treasury (Note 2)
$ 15,094 $
15,140
Other (Note 3)
100
-
Total Intragovernmental
$ 15,194 $
15,140
Accounts Receivable, Net
2
.
Property, Plant & Equipment, Net (Note 4)
4,445
3,644
Total Assets
$ 19,641 $
18,784
LIABILITIES
Int rago vernment al:
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities
141
202
Other (Note 5)
21
79
T otal Intragovernmental
$ 162 $
281
Accounts Payable & Accrued Liabilities
$ 1,088 $
1,320
Payroll & Benefits Payable (Note 6)
239
956
Other (Note 5)
14,088
13,421
Total Liabilities
$ 15,577 $
15,978
NET POSITION
Cumulative Results of Operations
4,064
2,806
Total Net Position
4,064
2,806
Total liabilities and Net Position
$ 19,641 $
18,784
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
11-1-0157 EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements 9
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Statement of Net Cost
For the Years Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY2010
FY2009
COSTS
Gross Costs (Note 9) $
16,990 $
16,314
Expenses from Other Appropriations (Note 7)
37,256
49,215
Total Costs $
54,246 $
65,529
Less:
Earned Revenue (Notes 8 and 9)
17,885
17,850
NET COST OF OPERATIONS (Note 9) $
36,361 $
47,679
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
11-1-0157 EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements 10
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Statement of Changes in Net Position
For the Years Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009
(Dollars in Thousands)
Cumulative Results of Operations:
FY 2010
FY 2009
Net Position - Beginning of Period
Beginning Balances, as Adjusted
2,806
$ 2,806 $
1,249
1,249
Budgetary Financing Sources:
Nonexehange Revenue - Securities Investment
Nonexchange Revenue - Other
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 7)
Total Budgetary Financing Sources
6
2
37,256
$ 37,264 $
8
49,215
49,223
Other Financing Sources (Non-Exchange)
Imputed Financing Sources
Total Other Financing Sources
355
$ 355 $
13
13
Net Cost of Operations
(36,361)
(47,679)
Net Change
1,258
1,557
Cumulative Results of Operations
$ 4,064 $
2,806
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
Environmental Protection Agency
11-1-0157 EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements 11
-------
PRIA
Statement of Budgetary Resources
For the Years Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009
(Dollars in Thousands)
FY 2010 FY 2009
BUDGETARY RES OURGES
Unobligated Balance, Brought Forward, October 1:
Adjusted Subtotal
Recoveries of Prior Year Unpaid Obligations
Budgetary Authority:
Appropriation
Spending Authority from Offs etting Collections
Earned:
Collected
Total Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections
Total Budgetary Resources
6,980
6,980
18,557
25,540
8,872
8,872
319
15,998
25,191
STATUS OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES
Obligations Incurred:
Direct
Total Obligations Incurred
Unobligated Balances:
Apportioned
Total Unobligated Balances
Unobligated Balances Not Available
Total Status of Budgetary Resources
$ 18,147 $ 18,211
18,147 18,211
7,368 6,980
7,368 6,980
25_ -
$ 25,540 $ 25,191
FY 2010
CHANGE IN OBLIGATED BALANCE
Obligated Balance, Net:
Unpaid Obligations, Brought Forward, October 1
Total Unpaid Obligated Balance, Net
Obligations Incurred, Net
Less: Gross Outlays
Less: Recoveries of Prior Year Unpaid Obligations, Actual
Total, Change in Obligated Balance
8,161
8,161
18,147
(18,607)
7,701
FY 2009
7,812
7,812
18,211
(17,543)
(319)
8,161
Obligated Balance, Net, End of Period:
Unpaid Obligations
Total, Unpaid Obligated Balance, Net, End of Period
7,701
7,701
8,161
8,161
NET OUTLAYS
Net Outlays:
Gross Outlays
Less: Offsetting Collections
Less: Distributed Offsetting Receipts (Note 1 Section L)
Total, Net Outlays
18,607
(3)
(18,557)
47
17,543
(2)
(15,833)
1,708
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
12
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
PRIA
Notes to Financial Statements
(Dollars in Thousands)
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
A. Reporting Entity
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) was created in 1970 by
executive reorganization from various components of other Federal agencies in order to better
marshal and coordinate federal pollution control efforts. The Agency is generally organized
around the media and substances it regulates — air, water, land, hazardous waste, pesticides and
toxic substances.
The Pesticide Registration Fund (PRIA) is authorized under the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Act of 2003 (which amended the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act — FIFRA), and became effective on March 23, 2004. This Act authorizes EPA to assess and
collect pesticide registration service fees on applications submitted to register pesticides covered
by this Act, as well as, assess and collect fees to register new active ingredients not listed in the
Registration Division 2003 Work Plan of the Office of Pesticide Programs. The Pesticide
Registration Improvement Renewal Act (commonly referred to as PRIA II) extended the
authority to collect pesticide registration service fees through FY 2012. PRIA II became
effective October 1, 2007. The PRIA Fund is accounted for under Treasury symbol number
68X5374.
PRIA 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 2010 and 2009 were $37,256 thousand and $49,215 thousand,
respectively. This amount was included as Income from Other Appropriations on the Statement
of Changes in Net Position and as Expenses from Other Appropriations on the Statement of Net
Cost for FYs 2010 and 2009.
B. 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 Pesticide Registration Fund
(PRIA) as required by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and the Pesticide Registration
Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003. In the prior years, pesticide registration was included in the
FIFRA financial statements. The reports have been prepared from the books and records of EPA
in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-136 Financial
Reporting Requirements, and EPA's accounting policies which are summarized in this note.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
13
-------
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. The balances in these reports have been updated from the EPA consolidated financial
statements to reflect the use of FY 2010 cost factors for calculating imputed costs for Federal
civilian benefits programs. These updates impact the Balance Sheet, Statement of Net Cost, and
Statement of Changes in Net Position.
C. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting
Funding for PRIA is provided by fees collected from industry to offset costs incurred by EPA in
carrying out these programs. Each year EPA submits an apportionment request to OMB based
on the anticipated collections of industry fees.
D. Basis of Accounting
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for Federal entities is the standard
prescribed by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB), which is the official
standard setting body for the federal government. The financial statements are prepared in
accordance with GAAP for federal entities.
Transactions are recorded on an accrual accounting basis and a budgetary basis. Under the
accrual method, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when a
liability is incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary accounting
facilitates compliance with legal constraints and controls over the use of Federal funds. All
interfund balances and transactions have been eliminated.
E. Revenues and Other Financing Sources
For FYs 2010 and 2009, PRIA received funding from fees collected from registrants requesting
pesticide registrations. For FYs 2010 and 2009, revenues were recognized from fee collections
to the extent that expenses are incurred during the fiscal year.
F. Funds with the Treasury
The PRIA fund deposits receipts and processes disbursements through its operating account
maintained at the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
G. Investments in U. S. Government Securities
Investments in U. S. government securities are maintained by Treasury and are reported at
amortized cost net of unamortized discounts. Discounts are amortized over the term of the
investments and reported as interest income. FIFRA holds the investments to maturity, unless
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
14
-------
needed to finance operations of the fund. No provision is made for unrealized gains or losses on
these securities because, in the majority of cases, they are held to maturity.
H. General Property, Plant and Equipment
Purchases of EPA-held personal equipment are capitalized if the equipment is valued at $25
thousand or more and has an estimated useful life of at least two years. Depreciation is taken on
a basic straight-line method over the specific asset's useful life, ranging from two to 15 years.
EPA shows property, plant and equipment at net of depreciation on its audited financial
statements.
All funds (except for the Working Capital Fund) capitalize software if those investments are
considered Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) or CPIC Lite systems with the
provisions of SFFAS No. 10, "Accounting for Internal Use Software." Once software enters the
production life cycle phase, it is depreciated using the straight-line method over the specific
asset's useful life ranging from two to 10 years.
I. Liabilities
Liabilities represent the amount of monies or other resources that are likely to be paid by the
Agency as the result of an Agency transaction or event that has already occurred and can be
reasonably estimated. However, no liability can be paid by the Agency without an appropriation
or other collections. Liabilities for which an appropriation has not been enacted are classified as
unfunded liabilities and there is no certainty that the appropriations will be enacted. For PRIA,
liabilities are liquidated from fee receipts, since PRIA receives no appropriation. Liabilities of
the Agency arising from anything other than contracts can be abrogated by the Government
acting in its sovereign capacity.
J. Accrued Unfunded Annual Leave
Annual, sick and other leave is expensed as taken during the fiscal year. Sick leave earned but
not taken is not accrued as a liability. Annual leave earned but not taken as of the end of the
fiscal year is accrued as an unfunded liability. Accrued unfunded annual leave is included in the
Balance Sheet as a component of "Payroll and Benefits Payable."
K. Retirement Plan
There are two primary retirement systems for Federal employees. Employees hired prior to
January 1, 1987, may participate in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). On January 1,
1984, the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) went into effect pursuant to Public Law
99-335. Most employees hired after December 31, 1983, are automatically covered by FERS
and Social Security. Employees hired prior to January 1, 1984, elected to either join FERS and
Social Security or remain in CSRS. A primary feature of FERS is that it offers a savings plan to
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
15
-------
which the Agency automatically contributes one percent of pay and matches any employee
contributions up to an additional four percent of pay. The Agency also contributes the
employer's matching share for Social Security.
With the issuance of SFFAS No. 5, "Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government,"
accounting and reporting standards were established for liabilities relating to the federal
employee benefit programs (Retirement, Health Benefits, and Life Insurance). SFFAS No. 5
requires that the employing agencies recognize the cost of pensions and other retirement benefits
during their employees' active years of service. SFFAS No. 5 requires that the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM), as administrator of the CSRS and FERS, the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program, and the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Program, provide
federal agencies with the actuarial cost factors to compute the liability for each program.
L. Offsetting Receipts
Beginning in FY 2007 OMB Circular A-13 6, Financial Reporting Requirements, requires that
the amount of distributed offsetting receipts reported in the Statement of Budgetary Resources
(SBR) should equal the amount recorded as offsetting receipts by the Department of the Treasury
(Treasury). Pesticide Registration Fees collected under PRIA are considered to be offsetting
receipts by Treasury.
M. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements requires management to make certain estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of
revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Note 2. Fund Balance with Treasury
FY 2010 FY 2009
Revolving Funds: Entity Assets $ 15,094 $ 15,140
Note 3. Other Assets
Other Assets consist of advances for Interagency Agreements.
Note 4. General Property, Plant and Equipment
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
16
-------
General property, plant and equipment consists of EPA-Held personal property and software in
development.
As of September 30, 2010 and 2009, General Property, Plant and Equipment consist of the
following:
FY 2010 FY 2009
Acquisition Accumulated Net Book Acquisition Accumulated Net Book
Value Depreciation Value Value Depreciation Value
EPA-Held Equipment $ 446 $ (239) $ 207 $ 319 $ (238) $ 81
Software 4,238 - 4,238 3,562 - 3,562
Total $ 4,684 $ (239) $ 4,445 $ 3,881 $ (238) $ 3,643
Note 5. Other Liabilities
For FYs 2010 and 2009, Payroll and Benefits Payable, non-federal, are presented on a separate
line of the Balance Sheet and in a separate footnote (see Note 6).
FY 2010 FY 2009
Other Intragovernmental Liabilities - Covered
by Budgetary Resources
Employer Contributions - Payroll $ 21 $ 79
Total $ 21~ $ 19
Other Non-Federal Liabilities - Covered by
Budgetary Resources
Advances from Non-Federal Entities $ 14,088 $ 13,421
Total $ 14,088 $ 13,421
11-1-0157 EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements 17
-------
Note 6. Payroll and Benefits Payable, Non-Federal:
FY 2010 FY 2009
Covered by Budgetary Resources
Accrued Payroll Payable to Employees $ 61 $ 227
Withholdings Payable 29 124
Thrift Savings Plan Benefits Payable 3 12
Total $ 93 $ 363
Not Covered by Budgetary Resources
Unfunded Annual Leave $ 146 $ 593
Total $ 146" $ 593
At various periods throughout FYs 2010 and 2009 employees with their associated payroll costs
were transferred from the fund to the Environmental Programs and Management (EPM)
appropriation. (See graph in Note 7 below showing trend of hours charged per month to the
PRIA Fund for FYs 2010 and 2009.) These employees were transferred in order to keep PRIA's
obligations and disbursements within budgetary limits.
This process has led to variations between the year-end liabilities of FYs 2010 and 2009. The
liabilities covered by budgetary resources (both intragovernmental and non-Federal) represent
unpaid payroll and benefits at year-end. For FY 2010 Pay Period 26; 18 employees charged to
PRIA part of their salary and benefits. As of September 30, 2010, these liabilities were $21
thousand and $93 thousand for employer contributions and accrued funded payroll and benefits
as compared to FY 2009's balances of $79 thousand and $363 thousand, respectively.
In contrast, the unfunded annual leave liability is a longer term liability than the funded
liabilities. At various periods throughout FYs 2010 and FY 2009, approximately 144 and 173
employees, respectively, in total have been under PRIA's accountability. As of September 30,
2010 and 2009 liability balances for unfunded annual leave were accrued to cover these
employees for a total of $146 thousand and $593 thousand, respectively.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
18
-------
Note 7. 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 2010 and 2009, EPA had two appropriations which funded a variety of
programmatic and non-programmatic activities across the Agency, subject to statutory
requirements. The EPM appropriation was created to fund personnel compensation and benefits,
travel, procurement, and contract activities. Transfers of employees from PRIA to EPM at
various times during FYs 2010 and 2009 (see Note 6 above) resulted in an increase in payroll
expenses in EPM, and these costs financed by EPM are reflected as an increase in the Expenses
from Other Appropriations on the Statement of Net Cost. The increased financing from EPM is
reported on the Statement of Changes in Net Position as Income from Other Appropriations.
In terms of hours charged to PRIA each month, the transfers of employees and their associated
costs during FYs 2010 and 2009 are shown below. Note that a decrease in hours charged to
PRIA normally signifies an increase in EPM's payroll costs, and vice versa.
PRIA - Total Employee Hours by Month
o
X
$ 8,000
O
Q.
E
° ^
-------
EPM costs related to PRIA are allocated based on specific EPM program codes which have been
designated for Pesticide registration activities. As illustrated below, there is no impact on
PRIA's Statement of Net Position.
Income From Other Expenses From Other Net
Appropriations Appropriations Effect
FY 2010 $
37,256 $
37,256
$
0
FY 2009 $
49,215 $
49,215
$
0
Note 8. Exchange Revenues, Statement of Net Cost
For FYs 2010 and 2009, the exchange revenues reported on the Statement of Net Cost consists of
non-Federal amounts.
Note 9. Intragovernmental Costs and Exchange Revenue
FY 2010 FY 2009
COSTS:
Intragovernmental $ 2,730 $ 2,776
With the Public 14,260 13,538
Expenses from Other Appropriations 37,256 49,215
Total Costs $ 54,246 $ 65,529
REVENUE:
With the Public 17,885 17,850
Total Revenue $ 17,885 $ 17,850
NET COST OF OPERATIONS $ 36,361 $ 47,679
Intragovernmental costs relate to the source of the goods or services not the classification of the
related revenue.
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
20
-------
Note 10. Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations to Budget (formerly the Statement of
Financing)
FY 2010 FY 2009
RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES:
Budgetary Resources Obligated
Obligations Incurred 3
i 18,147 $
18,211
Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections and Recoveries
(3)
(321)
Obligations, Net of Offsetting Collections 3
i 18,144 $
17,890
Less: Offsetting Receipts (Note 1 Section L)
(18,557)
(15,833)
Net Obligations
(413)
2,057
Other Resources
Imputed Financing Sources 3
i 355 $
12
Income from Other Appropriations (Note 7)
37,256
49,215
Net Other Resources Used to Finance Activities 3
i 37,611 $
49,227
Total Resources Used To Finance Activities 3
i 37,198 $
51,284
RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ITEMS
NOT PART OF NET COST OF OPERATIONS
Change in Budgetary Resources Obligated 3
i (261) $
(38)
Resources that Fund Prior Periods Expenses
(446)
-
Offsetting Receipts Not Affecting Net Cost (Note 1 Section L)
18,557
15,833
Resources that Finance Asset Acquistion
(803)
(1,684)
Total Resources Used to Finance Items Not
Part of the Net Cost of Operations 3
i 17,047 $
14,111
Total Resources Used to Finance the Net
Cost of Operations 3
i 54,245 $
65,395
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 3
i - $
98
Increase in Public Exchange Revenue Receivable
(17,885)
(17,850)
Total Components of Net Cost of Operations that
Requires or Generates Resources in the Future 3
i (17,885) $
(17,752)
Components Not Requiring/Generating Resources:
Depreciation and Amortization
1
36
Total components of Net cost of Operations that Will Not Require or Generate Resources
1
36
Total components of Net cost of Operations that Will Not Require
or Generate Resources in the Current Period
(17,884)
(17,716)
Net Cost of Operations 3
i 36,361 $
47,679
11-1-0157
EPA's FY 2010 Annual PRIA Financial Statements
21
-------
Distribution
Appendix B
Office of the Administrator
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Assistant Administrator for Administration and Resources Management
Deputy Chief Financial Officer
Agency Followup Coordinator
General Counsel
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intragovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for External Affairs and Environmental Information
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Deputy Director, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Senior Advisor, PRIA Implementation, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety
and Pollution Prevention
Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs,
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Director, Office of Human Resources, Office of Administration and Resources Management
Director, Office of Financial Management, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Office of Financial Services, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Reporting and Analysis Staff, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Financial Policy and Planning Staff, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Research Triangle Park Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Cincinnati Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Las Vegas Finance Center, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Director, Payroll Management and Outreach Staff, Office of Financial Services,
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Staff Director, Accountability and Control Staff, Office of Financial Services, Office of the
Chief Financial Officer
Audit Followup Coordinator, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Audit Followup Coordinator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Audit Followup Coordinator, Office of Administration and Resources Management
PRIA Audit Coordinator, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
11-1-0157
------- |