j A *
1®
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Ensuring the safety of chemicals
EPA Not Effectively
Implementing the
Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair and Painting Rule
Report No. 19-P-0302
September 9, 2019
-------
Report Contributors: Sarah Davidson
Jeffrey Harris
Natasha Henry
Chad Kincheloe
Barry Parker
Abbreviations
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CMS
Compliance Monitoring Strategy
EJ 2020
Environmental Justice 2020 Action Agenda
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY
Fiscal Year
NPMG
National Program Manager Guidance
OCSPP
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
OECA
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OIG
Office of Inspector General
RRP
Renovation, Repair and Painting
TSCA
Toxic Substances Control Act
U.S.C.
United States Code
Cover Photo: House with lead paint undergoing renovation. (EPA photo)
Are you aware of fraud, waste or abuse in an
EPA program?
EPA Inspector General Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2431T)
Washington, DC 20460
(888) 546-8740
(202) 566-2599 (fax)
OIG Hotline@epa.gov
Learn more about our OIG Hotline.
EPA Office of Inspector General
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2410T)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 566-2391
www.epa.gov/oiq
Subscribe to our Email Updates
Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig
Send us your Project Suggestions
-------
x-^tD SW
*. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 19-P-0302
& \ Dffirp nf ln«nprtnr ttpnpral September 9,2019
. u.o. CMViiuMiimiiidi nuiei/U
\ Office of Inspector General
% 5322 J
At a Glance
Why We Did This Project
The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Office
of Inspector General (OIG)
conducted this audit to
determine whether the EPA
has an effective strategy to
implement and enforce the
lead-based paint rule.
The EPA's Lead Renovation,
Repair and Painting (RRP)
Rule is intended to protect the
public by addressing hazards
associated with renovation,
repair and painting activities
that disturb lead-based paint in
specific housing and child-
occupied facilities. Lead-based
paint was used in an estimated
38 million homes prior to its
ban for residential use in 1978.
Renovation, repair and painting
activities that disturb lead-
based paint can create
hazardous exposures to lead.
In children, exposure to lead
can cause health problems,
including the potential for
slower growth, lower IQ and
behavioral problems.
This report addresses the
following:
• Ensuring the safety of
chemicals.
Address inquiries to our public
affairs office at (202) 566-2391 or
OIG WEBPOSTINGS@epa.gov.
EPA Not Effectively Implementing the Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
What We Found
The EPA does not have an effective strategy to
implement and enforce the lead-based paint rule.
Specifically:
Effective oversight and
enforcement are
needed to further
reduce lead exposures
from renovation, repair
and painting activities.
• The EPA does not have sufficient controls to
assess RRP program effectiveness and
progress toward goals. The agency does not
review regional targeting strategies, track RRP resources and outreach
activities, review inspections, or evaluate progress toward reducing
disparities in blood lead levels among children.
• There is insufficient coordination and communication between the two EPA
program offices primarily responsible for the RRP program—the Office of
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance.
• EPA regions could benefit from sharing regionally developed tools, ideas
and approaches.
The issues noted above occurred because program guidance does not
sufficiently define RRP program objectives, goals and measurable outcomes to
track progress and determine accountability.
Without an effective strategy for the RRP program, the EPA cannot determine
whether the program is achieving its intended purpose to protect the public,
particularly related to specific housing and child-occupied facilities.
Recommendations and Agency Response
We recommend that the EPA identify the regulated universe for the RRP
program; update current program guidance; establish management oversight
controls as well as objectives, goals and measurable outcomes; and establish a
forum to share best practices and innovations. We consider two of our six
recommendations resolved with corrective actions pending, while four
recommendations are unresolved.
List of OIG reports.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
September 9, 2019
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: EPA Not Effectively Implementing the
Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
Report No. 19-P-0302
FROM: Charles J. Sheehan, Deputy Inspector General
TO:
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, Assistant Administrator
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Susan Bodine, Assistant Administrator
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
This is our report on the subject audit conducted by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The project number for this audit was
OA&E-FY18-0162. This report contains findings that describe problems the OIG identified and
corrective actions the OIG recommends. This report presents the opinion of the OIG and does not
necessarily represent the final EPA position. Final determinations on matters in this report will be made
by EPA managers in accordance with established audit resolution procedures.
Action Required
We consider Recommendations 1 through 4, addressed to the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance, to be unresolved. In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, the resolution
process begins immediately with the issuance of the report. We are requesting a meeting within 30 days
between the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and the OIG's
Assistant Inspector General for Audit and Evaluation. If resolution is not reached, the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance is required to complete and submit a dispute resolution request
to the Chief Financial Officer.
For Recommendations 5 and 6, the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention provided
acceptable corrective actions and milestone dates. In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, both
recommendations are resolved and no further response is required. However, if you submit a response, it
will be posted on the OIG's website, along with our memorandum commenting on your response. Your
response should be provided as an Adobe PDF file that complies with the accessibility requirements of
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. The final response should not contain data
that you do not want to be released to the public; if your response contains such data, you should
identify the data for redaction or removal along with corresponding justification.
We will post this report to our website at www.epa.gov/oig.
-------
EPA Not Effectively Implementing
the Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair and Painting Rule
19-P-0302
Table of C
Chapters
1 Introduction 1
Purpose 1
Background 1
Responsible Offices 6
Scope and Methodology 6
Prior Report 7
2 EPA Lacks Effective Strategy to Implement and
Enforce the RRP Program 8
EPA Lacks Controls to Define and Track
Program Objectives and Goals 8
RRP Strategies Not Coordinated 13
Program Staff Innovations Not Being Shared 15
Conclusion 16
Recommendations 16
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation 17
Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits 18
Appendices
A Agency Response to Draft Report 19
B Distribution 25
-------
Chapter 1
Introduction
Purpose
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) conducted this audit to determine whether the EPA has an
effective strategy to implement and enforce the lead-based paint rule.
Background
Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
The EPA's Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule1 is intended to
protect the public by addressing hazards associated with renovation, repair and
painting activities in target housing2 and child-occupied facilities3 that disturb
lead-based paint. The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of
1992 and Sections 402 and 404 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
authorized the creation of the RRP Rule, which was issued in 2008 and amended
in 2010.
The RRP Rule established a three-pronged program consisting of regulation,
compliance enforcement and education/outreach. Firms conducting RRP projects
that disturb lead-based paint are subject to EPA enforcement and compliance
monitoring inspections and must:
• Be certified by the EPA.
• Use certified renovators who are trained by EPA-approved training
providers.
• Follow lead safe work practices.
Education and outreach efforts are focused on owners of child-occupied facilities,
homeowners and renters in areas with older housing, vulnerable populations and
renovation firms.
1 For this report, we use the terms lead-based paint rule, RRP Rule, and the RRP program interchangeably when
referring to the Lead Renovation Repair and Painting Rule.
2 Target housing is defined in 15 U.S.C. § 2681(17) as any housing constructed before 1978, except housing for
elderly persons or persons with disabilities or any 0-bedroom dwelling (unless any child who is less than 6 years of
age resides or is expected to reside in such housing).
3 A child-occupied facility is defined under the rule as a building, or portion of a building, constructed prior to 1978,
visited regularly by the same child, under 6 years of age, on at least two different days within any week (Sunday
through Saturday period), provided that each day's visit lasts at least 3 hours and the combined weekly visits last at
least 6 hours, and the combined annual visits last at least 60 hours. Child-occupied facilities may include, but are not
limited to, day care centers, preschools and kindergarten classrooms. Child-occupied facilities may be located in
target housing or in public or commercial buildings. (40 CFR §§ 745.83 and 745.223)
19-P-0302
1
-------
In 2010, the RRP program's regulated universe was estimated to comprise of
approximately 320,000 renovators who performed approximately 18 million
renovation, repair and painting projects annually.4
Health Risks from Lead Paint
Lead-based paint was used in an estimated 38 million homes in the United States
prior to its ban for residential use in 1978. Older homes are more likely to contain
lead-based paint. Approximately 87 percent of homes built before 1940 have
some lead-based paint, while 24 percent of homes built between 1960 and 1978
have some lead-based paint.
Figure 1: Prevalent period when housing was built
Before 1940
Source; Census Atlas of the United States Census 2000 Special Reports,
4 The EPA-estimated renovators and renovations population includes regulated entities covered by both the
2008 RRP Rule and the 2010 amendment.
19-P-0302
Period When
Housing Was Built, 2000
1 1990 and after
1980 to 1989
1970 to 1979
1960 to 1969
Prevalent
-------
The EPA's RRP program is a key element in the EPA's efforts to reduce the
prevalence of childhood lead poisoning, particularly lead poisoning caused by
housing contaminated by renovation activities. According to the "Childhood Lead
Poisoning Prevention" webpage of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's National Center for Environmental Health, lead-based paint and
lead-contaminated household dust together are a major source of lead exposure
for children. Common renovation, repair and painting activities that disturb lead-
based paint (such as sanding, cutting and replacing windows) can create
hazardous lead dust and chips that can be harmful to adults and children.
In children, exposure to lead can cause health problems, including the potential
for slower growth, lower IQ and behavioral problems. In adults, lead exposure
may result in poor pregnancy outcomes, memory problems and high blood
pressure.
Lead Risks Addressed in EPA's Environmental Justice Program
Lead exposure to children is addressed in the EPA's Environmental Justice 2020
Action Agenda (EJ 2020) that is designed to meet the environmental and public
health challenges confronting the nation's minority, low-income, tribal and
indigenous populations. One priority of EJ 2020 is to eliminate disparities in
childhood blood lead levels in low-income children compared to non-low-income
children. EJ 2020 states the EPA will develop strategies to:
• Educate communities on sources of lead contamination and the health
effects of lead.
• Raise awareness of lead-based paint exposure and prevention tactics.
• Increase efforts to ensure adequate lead-based paint workforces
(e.g., inspectors, contractors, trainers, etc.).
The EPA committed to track disparities of blood lead levels as a measure of
progress.
Federal Action Plan to Reduce Children's Exposure to Lead
In furtherance of Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks, the EPA,
working with other federal agencies,
developed a federal strategy to reduce
childhood lead exposure and associated health
effects, commonly referred to in the news
media as the "war on lead." The Federal
Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead
Exposures and Associated Health Impacts
(Federal Action Plan) was released in
"Lead exposure is a significant
health and safety threat to
children across the country.
EPA is committed to taking
action to address this threat,
and improve health outcomes
for our nation's most vulnerable
citizens - our children."
- Former EPA Administrator
Scott Pruitt, February 5, 2018
19-P-0302
3
-------
December 2018. The Federal Action Plan is the product of the President's Task
Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. The plan is a
blueprint for reducing lead exposure through collaboration among federal
agencies and with a range of stakeholders, including states, tribes and local
communities, along with businesses, property owners and parents. The stated
purpose of the Federal Action Plan is to help federal agencies work strategically
and collaboratively to reduce exposure to lead and improve children's health.
EPA Policy and Guidance
The implementation, enforcement and compliance of the RRP program is guided
primarily by three documents:
"The NPM Guidances provide a
national operational framework
used by the regions, states, and
tribes to implement programmatic
activities protective of human
health and the environment."
- EPA's Overview to the
FYs 2018-2019 National
Program Manager Guidances
• The Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention's (OCSPP's)
National Program Manager Guidance
(NPMG).
• The Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance's (OECA's)
NPMG.
• The TSCA Compliance Monitoring
Strategy (CMS).
RRP program requirements apply to firms and individuals performing renovation
work that disturbs lead-based paint during renovation, repair and painting
activities, and to training providers. The EPA RRP program provides information
to help entities comply with RRP program implementation and helps this
regulated community maintain program compliance.
Implementation
The OCSPP is primarily responsible for directing program implementation for the
RRP program in regions, authorized states and tribes.5 The fiscal years (FYs) 2016-
2017 NPMG identified lead risk-reduction as a national area of focus and directed
that EPA regions and authorized states implement eight lead program activities,
including RRP. Some example activities included RRP Rule implementation, as well
as outreach to renovators, homeowners and owners of child-occupied facilities.
OCSPP guidance also stated that the EPA is working to reduce the number of
children with blood lead levels of five micrograms per deciliter or higher, with a
long-term goal of closing the gap between the geometric mean blood lead levels
among low-income children versus non-low-income children from a baseline
percentage difference of 28.4 percent (2007-2010) to a difference of 10 percent or
less by FY 2018.
5 Fourteen states and one tribe have received EPA authorization to administer their own RRP programs.
19-P-0302
4
-------
Additionally, the OCSPP NPMG directed regional offices to provide outreach for
the RRP program, provide information and compliance assistance to the regulated
community, and coordinate implementation with OECA on lead program
regulations and activities as identified in the TSCA CMS.
The FYs 2018-2019 OCSPP NPMG did not contain any specific RRP-related
activities.
Enforcement and Compliance
OECA primarily directs enforcement and compliance for the RRP program at the
EPA regional and authorized state and tribal levels. The FYs 2016-2017 OECA
NPMG and TSCA CMS were intended to work together to direct enforcement
activities. The OECA NPMG outlined enforcement and compliance priorities,
while the CMS provided guidance for developing and implementing EPA regional
TSCA compliance monitoring programs. Specifically, the OECA NPMG
identified the national compliance and enforcement priorities, provided national
direction for all compliance assurance programs, identified activities required to
be carried out by authorized programs, and described how the EPA will work with
states and tribes to verify compliance with environmental laws.
The CMS presents an overarching (multi-year) framework and principles for
TSCA compliance monitoring. According to the CMS, the goal of targeting is to
focus on the most significant environmental problems within a priority area and
locate operations that are potentially in violation where such noncompliance may
cause, or pose a risk of, childhood lead poisoning. Targeting for the lead-based
paint program should include where an area has widespread childhood lead
poisoning (a "Lead Hot Spot"6) or is an Environmental Justice, overburdened
community.7 Regions are encouraged to concentrate their efforts in "Lead Hot
Spots." Effective targeting requires that regions possess accurate and up-to-date
knowledge of their regulated universes. The CMS also notes that regional
compliance strategies for the RRP program should aim to promote compliance
with all the RRP requirements.
Each region is expected to have an overarching approach in allocating its
resources to confirm that the region focuses on its most significant environmental
problem(s) yet sustains essential capacity in each of its TSCA focus areas by, for
example, responding appropriately to tips and complaints.
The FYs 2016-2017 OECA NPMG stated that regions should implement program
priorities and activities, including those set out in detail in the CMS. The NPMG
6 "Lead Hot Spot" means any geographic area (or population sector) with widespread and/or severe childhood lead
poisoning. "Lead Hot Spot" generally means the same as "target area."
7 The EPA often uses the term "overburdened" to describe situations where multiple factors, including both
environmental and socio-economic stressors, act cumulatively to affect health and the environment. This concept is
particularly useful for understanding the stressors that contribute to persistent environmental health disparities.
19-P-0302
5
-------
further states that 90 percent of the regions' TSCA resources should focus on the
lead compliance assurance program, and that 95 percent of the efforts in the lead
program should focus on the RRP program.
The FYs 2018-2019 OECA NPMG does not contain any RRP-specific activities.
Responsible Offices
The EPA's national program managers for the RRP program are the OCSPP and
OECA. The OCSPP is primarily responsible for RRP program implementation,
such as outreach and education. OECA is primarily responsible for compliance
and enforcement within EPA regions. The OCSPP and OECA are also responsible
for oversight of 14 states and one tribe that have received authorization to
administer their own RRP programs.
Scope and Methodology
We conducted this performance audit from May 2018 through June 2019 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,
appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objective. We believe that the evidence obtained
provides a reasonable basis for our conclusions based on our objective.
To obtain an understanding of the agency's RRP program, we reviewed federal
laws, regulations, and EPA policy and guidance documents, including:
• OECA NPMGs for FYs 2016-2017 and FYs 2018-2019.
• OCSPP NPMGs for FYs 2016-2017 and FYs 2018-2019.
• TSCA Compliance Monitoring Strategy.
• EJ 2020.
• RRP Program Inspection Manual.
• Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated
Health Impacts (December 2018).
We interviewed staff from the OECA's Office of Compliance and Office of Civil
Enforcement, the OCSPP, and the Office of the Administrator's Office of
Environmental Justice. We also interviewed RRP program managers, inspectors
and the childrens health experts in EPA's Regions 5 and 6.
We also sent a short survey to all 10 EPA regions to inquire about RRP program
targeting strategies, funding and innovative approaches.
19-P-0302
6
-------
Prior Report
On July 25, 2012, we issued Report No. 12-P-0600. Review of Hotline Complaint
Concerning Cost and Benefit Estimates for EPA 's Lead-Based Paint Rule.
The OIG had received a hotline complaint concerning the EPA's 2008 Lead
Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule, and conducted a review to evaluate how
the EPA determined the costs and benefits of that rule. The OIG found that
although the EPA stated that its economic analysis underwent extensive intra-
agency review and was approved by the Office of Management Budget prior to
publication, the EPA used limited data to develop its cost and benefit estimates
for the rule. Recommended corrective actions were agreed to and have been
completed.
19-P-0302
7
-------
Chapter 2
EPA Lacks Effective Strategy to Implement and
Enforce the RRP Program
The EPA does not have an effective strategy to implement and enforce the lead-
based paint rule. We found that the regulated universe for the lead-based paint
rule program is unknown and has not been estimated in approximately a decade.
Specifically, we found that:
• The EPA lacks controls to define and track program objectives and goals.
• RRP strategies were not coordinated.
• Program staff innovations were not being shared.
The issues noted occurred because program guidance does not sufficiently define
RRP program objectives, goals and measurable outcomes to track progress and
determine accountability. As a result, the EPA cannot ensure equal and sufficient
protection of human health, particularly the prevention of childhood lead
poisoning.
EPA Lacks Controls to Define and Track Program Objectives and Goals
The EPA does not have sufficient internal controls to assess RRP program
effectiveness and progress toward goals. OECA does not review regional
targeting strategies, nor does it have up-to-date knowledge of the regulated
universe. EPA national program managers do not track RRP program resources
and outreach activities, review inspections, or evaluate progress toward reducing
disparities in childhood-elevated blood lead levels.
According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office's Standards for Internal
Control in the Federal Government, GAO-14-704G (September 2014), program
managers should continually seek ways to improve accountability in achieving an
entity's mission. Internal controls comprise the plans, methods, policies and
procedures used to fulfill the goals and objectives of the entity. The Government
Accountability Office's standards require documentation of agency activities,
which provides a means to retain organizational knowledge and mitigate the risk
of having that knowledge limited to a few personnel, as well to communicate that
knowledge as needed to external parties. A key factor in improving accountability
is to implement an effective internal control system, which helps an entity adapt
to shifting environments, evolving demands, changing risks and new priorities.
19-P-0302
8
-------
Regulated RRP Universe Not Known
The CMS emphasizes that effective targeting requires that EPA regions possess
accurate and up-to-date knowledge of their regulated universes (e.g., size, sectors
and compliance issues). We found that the OCSPP and OECA could not identify
or estimate a current number of renovators or renovations being conducted for
each region. Moreover, it has been approximately 10 years since the EPA
estimated the RRP program universe of renovators—which was approximately
320,000 firms conducting approximately 18 million renovations per year.
EPA's Enforcement Office Does Not Review Regional Targeting
Strategies
OECA national program managers could not identify or provide documented
strategies for any of the 10 regions for targeting "Lead Hot Spots." Further,
OECA was not able to provide evidence of its review of any strategies. The
TSCA CMS includes some criteria for what should be included in a region's
targeting strategy, such as:
• A balanced mix of work-site inspections.
• Training class audits.
• Record review inspections.
• Information request letters and subpoenas.
The CMS also directs EPA regions to focus their inspections on larger firms.
EPA regions used various targeting strategies. Some regions used tools such as
EJSCREEN8 and GeoPlatform9 to conduct geographic targeting. Two of the
10 regions indicated they did not have formal targeting strategies. Other regions
used lists of firms to target the largest firms in the region. Another region was
recently focused on military housing. The lack of specific OECA guidance and
national-level review of regional targeting strategies resulted in OECA relying only
on the skills and expertise of regional inspectors to target inspections rather than
targeting strategies as directed by the CMS. Without review of regional targeting
strategies, it is unclear if the regions are following the CMS criteria and targeting
approach or even have a targeting strategy.
8 The EPA's EJSCREEN is an Environmental Justice mapping and screening tool that provides the EPA with a
nationally consistent dataset and approach for combining environmental and demographic indicators.
9 The EPA's GeoPlatform Online is a collaborative web Geographic Information System that allows EPA staff,
contractors and collaborators to create and share maps and data internally and with the public.
19-P-0302
9
-------
EPA Not Tracking RRP Program Resources
In both the FYs 2019 and 2020 administration's proposed EPA budgets, the lead
risk-reduction program10 was targeted for elimination and lead paint certifications
would have continued under the Chemical Risk Review Reduction program. Despite
the proposed program defunding, in FY 2019 the lead risk-reduction program
received $12,627 million and 66 full-time equivalents to address exposure to lead
from lead-based paint through regulations, certification, training programs and public
outreach efforts. OECA and OCSPP do not allocate their full-time equivalents and
budget by sub-program. We found that EPA regional staff assigned to the RRP
program also work on other EPA programs.
Regional staff indicated that limited resources have impacted their ability to
adequately implement the RRP program. Two regions noted that a significant
challenge was the immense size of the regulated universe compared to the
available resources. One regional staff member indicated that, with existing
resources, it is difficult to provide a sufficient field presence to conduct training
and inspections that broadly impact compliance. A staff member from a different
region said that a declining number of inspectors and case development officers
limits the region's ability to adequately address the number of inspections
conducted, resulting in fewer cases developed. Additionally, a staff member from
a third region indicated that there is a significant backlog of inspections that have
not been developed into cases.
The FYs 2016-2017 OECA NPMG instructed that 90 percent of a region's TSCA
resources should focus on the lead compliance assurance program. The NPMG
further instructed that regions should strive to concentrate 95 percent of their efforts
to the RRP program. OECA does not track how the regions use their resources
between sub-programs and therefore is unable to evaluate whether the funds are
used effectively. In addition, nine out of 10 regions were unable to provide
information regarding how their resources were used at the sub-program level.
The FYs 2018-2019 OECA NPMG does not include instructions on the use of
lead compliance assistance program resources.
EPA Not Tracking Specific RRP Program Inspections and
Compliance Activities
OECA FYs 2016-2017 and FYs 2018-2019 NPMGs contain two lead-based paint
Annual Commitment System measures: (1) the number of TSCA inspections
conducted by regions broken out by the four major TSCA programs (see Figure 2)
and (2) reporting on other compliance activities by the four program areas.
10 The lead risk-reduction program includes RRP as well as the Pre-Renovation Education Rule (406), the Lead
Abatement Rule (402(a)), and the Disclosure Rule (1018).
19-P-0302
10
-------
Figure 2: Four major TSCA programs
New and Existing
Chemicals
Polychlorinated
Biphenyls
Asbestos
Lead-Based Paint
Source: EPA OIG based on the EPA's FYs 2016-2017
OECA NPMG.
The contributing RRP program inspections and compliance activities are included
in the overall Annual Commitment System measures tracked as a part of the lead-
based paint measures. The Annual Commitment System measures11 for lead-based
paint are not included in the FYs 2020-2021 National Program Guidances.12
For the first measure—overall lead-based paint inspections13 conducted by
regions—we found that total lead-based paint inspections in the regions vary
greatly (see Figure 3). For example, the 5-year average of lead-based paint
inspections reported in the Integrated Compliance Information System14 for Region
10 was 184, but for Region 6 was only 18. Over the last 5 years, the average
number of lead-based paint inspections as reported in the Integrated Compliance
Information System was 1,131, or less than one-half-of-1 percent of the last
estimated universe of renovators. OECA was unable to break down lead-based
paint inspections by sub-program (e.g., RRP program). In addition, six out of 10
regions were not able to provide a breakdown of lead-based paint inspections by
sub-program level.
Figure 3: Lead-based paint inspections under TSCA by region for FYs 2014-2018
¦ 2014 12015 12016 2017 B2018
300
250
iri u 111 Ik h b 11
123456789 10
EPA REGION
Source: OIG analysis of EPA data.
11 According to OECA and OCSPP, the Annual Commitment System lias been eliminated for FYs 2020 and 2021.
12 NPMGs are being referred to as National Program Guidances in FYs 2020-2021 guidances.
13 Overall lead-based paint inspections include RRP program inspections as well as inspections conducted for the
Lead Abatement Rule, the Pre-Renovation Education Rule and the Lead Disclosure Rule.
14 The Integrated Compliance Information System is a system that allows EPA managers and staff to view current
data on trends in compliance inspections, among other tilings.
19-P-0302
11
-------
We asked OECA the basis for determining regional RRP program inspection
projections and whether the basis included a workload assessment of regional staff.
OECA indicated that regional commitments are initiated by the regions, which are
asked by OECA to follow the NPMG and TSCA CMS when developing
commitments. A specific criterion for determining regional commitments was not
specified in OECA guidance or OECA responses to the OIG.
For the second measure—other compliance activities (which include off-site
records reviews broken out by TSCA program)—we found that OECA reported
that they did not have any FYs 2016 or 2017 reports, as this measure was not a
mandatory requirement for the regions and allowed for optional reporting of other
compliance monitoring activities.
Neither of these two measures help identify progress toward any RRP program or
other TSCA lead programs' outcomes.
EPA Not Tracking Outreach Activities
OCSPP national program managers reported that outreach activities were being
performed, but OCSPP did not track the extent to which regions were
implementing outreach activities or resources used for implementation. The EPA
did not have measures to determine meaningful results of these activities.
The OCSPP NPMG provided specific RRP program outreach activities expected
for regions to implement, including encouraging state and tribal RRP program
authorization, providing information on the hazards of renovation activities in
homes and child-occupied facilities with lead-based paint, and engaging with
state/city permitting and licensing officials.
Some outreach activities that the EPA reported include:
• The EPA training of 70 EPA staff, renovation contractors and citizens on
ways to address environmental health risks to children.
• EPA staff conducting in-person outreach to building permit offices in two
states to help inform contractors during the permit application process
about the RRP program requirements.
The EPA informed us that discussion of regional activities is covered in
conference calls and meetings with regional program managers. However, these
conference calls and meetings, covering RRP program activities, were only held
intermittently, and no meeting summaries were recorded. As noted earlier, federal
internal control standards require documentation of agency activities to provide
reasonable assurance that program objectives and goals are achieved, and
organizational knowledge is retained to mitigate the risk of having knowledge
limited to a few personnel.
19-P-0302
12
-------
The FYs 2018-2019 OCSPP NPMG no longer provides specifics on activities
regions should be conducting that will contribute to providing reasonable
assurance that program objectives and goals are achieved.
EPA Does Not Evaluate Changes in Childhood Blood Level Disparities
OCSPP national program managers said they did not track measures related to
elevated blood lead levels. The RRP program is a key effort in reducing the
prevalence of childhood lead poisoning, particularly lead poisoning caused by
housing contaminated by renovation activities. While there is no safe level of lead
for children, who are particularly vulnerable to the dangers of lead exposure, the
FYs 2016-2017 OCSPP NPMG states that the EPA is working to reduce the
number of children with blood lead levels of five micrograms per deciliter or
higher. The FYs 2018-2019 OCSPP NPMG does not address this area. The EPA
EJ 2020 action agenda aims to eliminate disparities in childhood blood lead levels
as an integral part of reducing lead exposure for all people.
EJ 2020 states that the EPA determines the performance result for this measure
from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey studies designed to
assess the health and nutritional status of adults and children in the United
States.15 EJ 2020 identifies the OCSPP as the national program manager for this
program. According to the OCSPP, it tracks and analyzes elevated blood lead
levels using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data but does
not report on measures related to elevated blood levels.
RRP Strategies Not Coordinated
OECA and OCSPP provided inconsistent responses when asked about program
goals and available guidance in the management of the RRP program. During
interviews with these offices, we received conflicting responses indicating there is
a lack of coordination and communication.
As noted previously, OCSPP did not report progress toward the stated goal of
reducing the difference in elevated blood lead levels between low-income and
non-low-income children. The EPA's Office of Environmental Justice within the
Office of the Administrator shared that it has not received updates on achieving this
goal from the OCSPP. OECA program managers indicated that they do not track
these efforts and do not have awareness on how the EPA is achieving these goals.
They further said that this was a responsibility of the OCSPP and not their own.
OCSPP program managers responded that the reduction in elevated blood lead
levels was no longer a measured goal and was not in the FYs 2018-2019 NPMG
despite it being identified as the EPA's long-term goal in the FYs 2016-2017
15 For lead, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention uses these data to update the lead reference level.
19-P-0302
13
-------
NPMG. Further, OECA and OCSPP had not coordinated the tracking or
measurement of the RRP program's outcomes.
The disconnect in program tracking and measurement was also apparent in
proposed program guidance. The agency has released its FYs 2020-2021 National
Program Guidance. National Program Guidances like the NPMGs are intended to
reflect the current administration's priorities by setting forth the strategies and
actions for the EPA and its partners to protect human health and the environment.
The FYs 2020-2021 OECA National Program Guidance reintroduces the RRP
program efforts, but the OCSPP guidance continues to not mention the RRP
program, a silence which is not supportive of the RRP program and the agency's
lead paint program efforts.
The EPA is legislatively mandated to implement the RRP Rule and continues to
have responsibility for ensuring that RRP programs are developed and
implemented and that the RRP program requirements are complied with and
enforced. OCSPP and OECA program offices should work together to improve
coordination to provide a unified and coordinated response to protect the public
from lead hazards related to the RRP program.
EPA Program Offices Inconsistent on What RRP Guidance
Regions Should Follow
The current FYs 2018-2019 NPMG for OCSPP and OECA do not provide
specific program objectives and goals nor include measurable outcomes for the
RRP program. OCSPP national program managers suggest the regions follow the
old FYs 2016-2017 NPMG in the absence of specific objectives in the current
NMPG. In contrast, OECA national program managers do not acknowledge the
old NPMG as being in effect in the absence of specific guidance in the current
NMPG.
OCSPP and OECA staff generally referred EPA regions to the old NPMG in the
absence of specific guidance for the lead risk-reduction program. One region
indicated that the lack of guidance was a challenge in implementing the lead-
based paint programs. Further, this region conveyed that the lack of program
guidance sends the message that these programs are not important. Two regions
told the OIG that this hurts employee morale.
EPA Program Guidance Documents Do Not Consistently Support
Federal "War on Lead" Action Plan
The EPA, working with other federal agencies, developed a federal strategy to
reduce childhood lead exposure and associated health effects, commonly referred
to in the news media as the "war on lead." The Federal Action Plan to Reduce
Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated Health Impacts goals describe key
priorities, objectives, potential impacts and actions, many of which are dependent
19-P-0302
14
-------
in part upon the EPA's lead risk-reduction program implementation and
enforcement responsibilities. However, the current OCSPP program guidance is
silent on lead risks and no longer includes lead risk-reduction as an agency
priority. The FYs 2020-2021 OECA guidance includes a National Compliance
Initiative to reduce children's exposure to lead, but the guidance does not provide
details on any potential measurable outcomes for the lead risk-reduction program.
The current NPMGs no longer identify lead risk-reduction as a national area of
focus as did the old NPMGs. The current NPMGs no longer provide EPA regions
and authorized states with direction or descriptions about RRP program activities
that should be undertaken, optional activities, priorities for enforcement and
compliance, or inspection expectations. The lack of focus on lead risk-reduction is
inconsistent with goals in the administration's December 2018 Federal Action
Plan. The action plan promotes goals for identifying lead-exposed children and
improving their health outcomes, as well as communicating effectively with
stakeholders to reduce lead exposures and related health risks.
Program Staff Innovations Not Being Shared
During interviews with regions, some RRP program themes that emerged were the
lack of resources, the need for program investment, and program staff
independently creating solutions to challenges faced. We found that EPA regions
work to create solutions individually but would benefit from the sharing of
regionally developed tools, ideas and approaches to common shared problems.
For example, in our discussions with EPA regions, each shared innovations, such
as the launching of pilot programs to test new ideas, partnerships with external
stakeholders, and other geographic initiatives. One region created a mapping tool
to assist in targeting. Another region created a flowchart of the enforcement
process as well as an electronic checklist that auto-populates estimated penalties
based on the penalty policy guidance. These, along with other examples, appeared
to be solutions to difficulties that multiple regions experience. However, regional
staff said that the regions did not have a consistent forum to share solutions and
issues, such as an electronic bulletin board or information repository. OECA and
OCSPP managers indicated there are regular calls and forums available for the
regional staff that could be used to share innovations.
Regional inspectors seemed to be the most creative in developing additional tools
because of challenges they encountered in the field. While some regions may
work with other regions to a certain extent, the current communication structure is
informal and not supportive of the sharing of these creative tools, ideas, solutions
and approaches. There is potential for a problem that was resolved in one region
being needlessly encountered in another region, with redundancies and wasted
resources being used to resolve it. The EPA regions could benefit from structured
information sharing and collaboration.
19-P-0302
15
-------
Conclusion
Explicit and measurable program objectives, goals and outcomes are needed to
demonstrate whether the RRP program is achieving its intended results to protect
the public by addressing hazards associated with renovation, repair and painting
activities in target housing and child-occupied facilities.
EPA national program managers need to first define the RRP program's regulated
universe to design targeting strategies for "Lead Hot Spots" and outreach activities.
Also, NPMGs or other appropriate national program guidance must clearly
communicate expectations for RRP program objectives, goals and measurable
outcomes. The measurable outcomes should be useful in determining RRP program
progress, identifying needed changes and providing accountability for program
resources. Better overall communication and sharing of information with regions
and authorized states should also provide additional opportunities for RRP program
effectiveness and efficiencies. Lastly, and more broadly, improvements to the RRP
program should focus on providing additional measurable outcomes and support
for the administration's Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures
and Associated Health Impacts goals to reduce childhood lead exposures and the
EPA EJ 2020 goal to eliminate disparities in childhood blood lead levels as an
integral part of reducing lead exposure for all people.
Recommendations
We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance:
1. Identify the regulated universe of Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair
and Painting Rule firms in support of regional targeting strategies, in
coordination with the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
2. Establish Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
enforcement objectives, goals and measurable outcomes.
3. Establish management oversight controls to verify that Lead-Based Paint
Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program guidance and expectations
are being met; this may also involve specific reporting requirements for
regions and authorized states and tribes.
4. Establish or identify an effective forum to document and share best
practices and innovations related to the Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair and Painting Rule Program.
19-P-0302
16
-------
We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention:
5. Establish specific guidelines for resources and funding allocated to the
Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program that will
further the goals of the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead
Exposures and Associated Health Impacts.
6. Establish the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
Program's objectives, goals and measurable outcomes, such as measures
to demonstrate the effectiveness of program contributions toward
decreasing elevated blood lead levels.
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation
For Recommendations 1 through 4, the agency believes that the recommendations
have been completed and, thus, no corrective action are necessary. However, for
the following reasons, we do not believe the proposed corrective actions for
Recommendations 1 through 4 meet the intent of the recommendations, and we
consider those recommendations unresolved.
• For Recommendation 1, the EPA does not describe how it will identify the
regulated universe of lead-based paint RRP firms.
• For Recommendation 2, the EPA does not identify specific objectives
linked to measurable outcomes to document the progress for the goals.
• For Recommendation 3, the EPA does not identify management oversight
controls to verify that lead-based paint RRP program guidance and
expectations are being met.
• For Recommendation 4, the EPA does not identify a forum that is used to
document and share best practices and innovations that regional staff
could use to share and document best practices and innovations.
The agency provided acceptable corrective actions and completion dates for
Recommendations 5 and 6. The EPA's response to Recommendation 5, to issue
guidance for resources and funding that will further the goals of the Federal
Action Plan, met the intent, but not the wording, of the recommendation.
Therefore, we slightly revised the recommendation to enable flexibility in EPA's
delivery of guidance.
The agency's response and our additional comments are in Appendix A. In
addition, the agency provided specific suggestions for our consideration, and we
made revisions to the report as appropriate.
19-P-0302
17
-------
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS
Rec.
No.
Page
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
Planned
Completion
Date
Potential
Monetary
Benefits
(in $000s)
1
16
Identify the regulated universe of Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair and Painting Rule firms in support of regional targeting
strategies, in coordination with the Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention.
U
Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
2
16
Establish Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting
Rule enforcement objectives, goals and measurable outcomes.
U
Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
3
16
Establish management oversight controls to verify that Lead-
Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program
guidance and expectations are being met; this may also involve
specific reporting requirements for regions and authorized states
and tribes.
u
Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
4
16
Establish or identify an effective forum to document and share
best practices and innovations related to the Lead-Based Paint
Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program.
u
Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
5
17
Establish specific guidelines for resources and funding allocated
to the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
Program that will further the goals ofthe Federal Action Plan to
Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated Health
Impacts.
R
Assistant Administrator for
Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
12/31/20
6
17
Establish the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting
Rule Program's objectives, goals and measurable outcomes,
such as measures to demonstrate the effectiveness of program
R
Assistant Administrator for
Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
12/31/20
contributions toward decreasing elevated blood lead levels.
1 C = Corrective action completed.
R = Recommendation resolved with corrective action pending.
U = Recommendation unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.
19-P-0302
18
-------
Appendix A
Agency Response to Draft Report
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, DC 20460
JUL 2 3 2019
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Response to OIG Draft Report: Additional Actions Needed for EPA to Effectively
Implement the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule (Project
No. OA&E-FY18-0162)
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the findings and proposed recommendations in the
June 21, 2019 Office of Inspector General's (OIG's) Draft Report entitled "Additional Actions
Needed for EPA to Effectively Implement the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and
Painting (RRP) Rule." The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) and the
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) have reviewed the Draft Report
and have met several times with OIG representatives to discuss the RRP program and OIG's
preliminary recommendations and offer the comments below. The objectives, goals, strategies
and methods of accountability for the RRP program are consistent with OECA's and OCSPP's
overall approach for all programs and are commensurate with available resources.
Discussion of Recommendations to OECA:
OECA believes each recommendation identified below has been completed, thereby leaving no
additional corrective actions necessary. Each recommendation is followed by a descriptive
response identifying the specific activities, reports and/or memorandum that fulfil the
requirement.
1. Identify the regulated universe of Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule
firms in support of regional targeting strategies, in coordination with the Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
FROM: Susan Parker Bodine, Assistant Administrator
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
^
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, Esq., Assistant Administra
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
TO:
Jeffrey I larris. Director
Toxics. Chemical Management and Pollution Prevention Directorate
19-P-0302
19
-------
Response: OECA agrees with the importance of targeting for the Lead-Based Paint RRP
Rule and already uses an appropriate and effective targeting method that does not require the
identification of the regulated universe of firms.
During the rulemaking process for the Lead RRP Rule, the universe of facilities subject to the
Lead RRP Rule was identified by OCSPP for the economic analysis (see 73 FR 21692,
21751-21752 (April 22, 2008); EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049), and OECA believes that an
update is not needed to facilitate targeting for enforcement purposes. OECA's development
of a new lead mapping tool helps to define the regulated universe of renovators as needed to
target inspections. Additionally, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Compliance
Monitoring Strategy (CMS) and the OECA's Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 National Program
Guidance (NPG) both recommend a geographic approach to address known "Lead Hot
Spots" through a "Place-based Initiative." With this approach, EPA will focus on ensuring
compliance in areas where our efforts will have the greatest impact to reduce lead exposures,
which does not require collecting additional information on the regulated universe.
OIG Response: The agency did not agree or disagree with the recommendation, and the
proposed corrective action does not meet the intent of the recommendation. Specifically, the
EPA does not describe how it will identify the regulated universe of lead-based paint RRP
firms, a CMS requirement for effective targeting strategies. Instead, the proposed corrective
action indicates that the EPA is using a targeting method that does not require the
identification of the regulated universe of firms. We consider Recommendation 1 unresolved.
2. Establish Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule enforcement objectives,
soals and measurable outcomes.
Response: OECA agrees with the recommendation and already uses several mechanisms
responsive to this recommendation.
First, OECA's National Compliance Initiative (NCI) memorandum identifies reducing lead
exposure as a high priority and summarizes how the national enforcement and compliance
assurance program will contribute to the agency-wide lead initiative (as part of the Federal
Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposure, https://www.epa.gov/lead/federal-action-
plan-reduce-childhood-lead-exposure). Memorandum, Susan Parker Bodine, FY2020-2023
National Compliance Initiatives (June 7, 2019). Second, OECA's final FY 2020-2021 NPG
articulates specific RRP enforcement objectives, goals and outcomes. The NPG charges
Regions to prioritize investigations of entities with far-reaching influence on the compliance
landscape and take enforcement as appropriate. For example, Regions are expected to: (a)
conduct geographic initiatives in Lead Hot Spots; (b) focus on firms that operate through
multiple physical locations across the nation; and/or (c) focus on firms that record renovation
work for televised renovation shows.16 See https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/national-
16 For an example of an enforcement action taken under the RRP Rule that was identified through national televised
programming and can have far-reaching impact across the industry, see the Settlement Information Sheet for
Magnolia Waco Properties, LLC onEPA's website: https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/magnolia-waco-properties-
11c-residential-property-renovation-rule-settlement-information.
19-P-0302
20
-------
program-guidances#fv20202021. These approaches align with OECA's commitment to
contribute to the Agency's implementation of the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood
Lead Exposure.
Furthermore, the NPG and OECA's elevation of lead to national priority status operate in
conjunction with other mechanisms to promote program progress and accountability. OECA
requires each Region to submit an annual strategic plan with performance commitments
consistent with NPG expectations. Moreover, program support and accountability are further
enhanced through quarterly teleconferences with the OECA AA, and routine
communications between OECA senior leadership (including the Assistant Administrator)
and regional enforcement managers regarding programmatic goals and outcomes. In addition,
OECA captures and reports enforcement outcomes, as well as inspections, in its internal
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) reporting system. Also, OECA reports
RRP enforcement outcomes publicly via its annual lead-based paint enforcement
accomplishment reports. See e.g., https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-enforcement-
actions-help-protect-vulnerable-communities-lead-based-paint-health-O. These reports
demonstrate the increasing effectiveness of the program. For example, in FY2018, EPA
reduced lead exposures from lead-based paint through 140 enforcement actions, including
117 RRP actions - compared to 75 RRP cases in FY2015.
OIG Response: The agency agreed with our recommendation, but the proposed corrective
action does not meet the intent of recommendation. The EPA does not identify specific
objectives linked to measurable outcomes to document the progress for the goals. Instead, the
proposed corrective action describes the EPA's priority of reducing lead exposure and
contributing to the agencywide lead initiative. We consider Recommendation 2 unresolved.
3. Establish management oversight controls to verify that Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair
and Painting Ride program guidance and expectations are being met; this may also involve
specific reporting requirements for regions and authorized states and tribes.
Response: OECA agrees with the importance of oversight and is currently implementing
controls that are effective for the RRP program and responsive to this recommendation.
As discussed above, OECA requires each Region to submit an annual strategic plan,
including performance commitments. Program support and accountability are further
enhanced through quarterly teleconferences and ongoing communications between OECA
senior leadership (including the Assistant Administrator) and regional enforcement managers
regarding programmatic goals and outcomes. Furthermore, OECA captures and reports
inspections in its internal ICIS reporting system. Also, End-Of-Year reports from state, tribal,
and territorial grantees that receive OECA State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
funding are reviewed annually as a form of oversight control.
19-P-0302
21
-------
OIG Response: The agency did not agree or disagree with the recommendation, and the
proposed corrective action does not meet the intent of the recommendation. Specifically, the
EPA does not identify management oversight controls to verify that lead-based paint RRP
program guidance and expectations are being met. As described in the report, the agency was
unable to provide evidence that annual strategic plans were reviewed or information on
regional RRP inspections and compliance activities, as they are one program added into the
overall Annual Commitment System measures being tracked as a part of the lead-based paint
measures. We consider Recommendation 3 unresolved.
4. Establish or identify an effective forum to document and share best practices and innovations
related to the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program.
Response: OECA agrees with this recommendation and has already established and
identified a variety of effective mechanisms and forums to document and share RRP program
best practices and innovations.
OECA provides a variety of forums and mechanisms that are widely used and effective for
communications with and among the Regions. These mechanisms support the timely
exchange of best practices and innovations that Regions can employ to address issues in the
RRP program. These mechanisms include:
• Monthly calls with lead-based paint enforcement practitioners;
• Quarterly calls with lead-based paint inspectors;
• On-demand access to a vast array of resources (e.g., guidance, models, prototypes,
examples) via the lead-based paint Intranet repository;
• Internal EPA inspector website;
• The lead enforcement practitioners' mentoring network (information available via the
Intranet site); and
• On-demand communications and ad hoc workgroups for interested practitioners to
address new, emerging and intransient issues.
OIG Response: The agency agreed with our recommendation, but the proposed corrective
action does not meet the intent of the recommendation. Specifically, the EPA does not
propose to establish or identify a forum that regional staff could use to share and document
best practices and innovations. Instead, the proposed corrective action describes mechanisms
that are not designed to support regional staff sharing best practices and innovations. We
consider Recommendation 4 unresolved.
Discussion of Recommendations to OCSPP:
5. Update its National Program Guidance to establish specific guidelines for resources and
funding allocated to the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Ride Program
19-P-0302 22
-------
that will further the goals of the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures
and Associated Health Impacts.
Response: OCSPP agrees with this recommendation and already has initiated efforts to this
end. OCSPP is currently drafting a memorandum from OCSPP to the Regions to establish
guidelines for resources and funding that will further the goals of the Federal Action Plan to
Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated Health Impacts ("Federal Action Plan").
This guidance will be commensurate to what is provided in the NPG.
Proposed Corrective Action: By December 31, 2020, OCSPP will establish guidelines for
resources and funding allocated to the Lead-Based Paint RRP Rule Program that will further
the goals of the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated
Health Impacts.
OIG Response: The agency agreed with our recommendation and provided an acceptable
planned corrective action and completion date. The EPA agrees to issue a guidance that will
be commensurate to what is provided in the NPMG. We have revised Recommendation 5 as
follows: "Establish specific guidelines for resources and funding allocated to the Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule Program that will further the goals of the
Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated Health Impacts."
We consider Recommendation 5 resolved with corrective action pending.
6. Establish the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Paintins Ride Program's objectives,
goals and measurable outcomes, such as measures to demonstrate the effectiveness of
program contributions toward decreasing elevated blood lead levels (EBLLs).
Response: OCSPP agrees with the recommendation to develop performance measures of the
effectiveness of the Lead RRP program, but has concerns about focusing those efforts on
measuring the RRP program's specific contributions to decreases in EBLLs. The RRP
program contributes directly to lowering of blood lead levels in the United States by
minimizing the creation of lead dust hazards to which children are exposed in the course of
renovation, repair and painting projects. Given the number of federal agencies involved in
reducing exposure to lead and to the resulting lowered blood lead levels, however, EPA
cannot apportion with any certainty the contribution of the RRP program to declining blood
lead levels. In lieu of this, OCSPP is currently developing other, equally meaningful Lead
RRP performance goals and measures, such as the extent to which EPA Regions are
implementing outreach activities, or the utilization of Regional resources used for Lead RRP
program implementation.
19-P-0302
23
-------
Proposed Corrective Action: By December 31, 2020, OCSPP will develop one or more
performance measures to meaningfully demonstrate the effectiveness of the Lead RRP
program's contributions to the protection of public health and the environment.
OIG Response: The agency agreed with our recommendation and provided an acceptable
planned corrective action and completion date. We consider Recommendation 6 resolved
with corrective action pending.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Draft Report. If you have any questions or
concerns regarding this response, please contact the OECA Audit Liaison, Gwendolyn Spriggs,
at (202) 564-2439, or the OCSPP Audit Liaison, Janet Weiner, at (202) 564-2309.
cc: Larry Starfield, OECA
Patrick Traylor, OECA
Charlotte Bertrand, OCSPP
David Hindin, OECA/OC
Rosemarie A. Kelley, OECA/OCE
Karin Koslow, OECA/OCE
Greg Sullivan, OECA/OCE
Lauren Kabler, OECA/OCE
Rochele Kadish, OECA/OC
Martha Segall, OECA/OC
Rick Duffy, OECA/OC
Susan Laessig, OECA/OC
Gwendolyn Spriggs, OECA/OAP
Janet Weiner, OCSPP
Cathy Stepp, Regional Administrator, Region 5
David Gray, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6
19-P-0302
24
-------
Appendix B
Distribution
The Administrator
Assistant Deputy Administrator
Associate Deputy Administrator
Chief of Staff
Deputy Chief of Staff
Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Agency Follow-Up Official (the CFO)
Agency Follow-Up Coordinator
General Counsel
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Management, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Director, Office of Continuous Improvement, Office of the Administrator
Director, Office of Children's Health Protection, Office of the Administrator
Director, Office of Civil Enforcement, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Director, Office of Compliance, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of the Administrator
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Office of
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Regions 1-10
19-P-0302
25
------- |