£
<
3>
O
%
Q
z
UJ
O
T
p*
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
MTERNAi
ONTROl
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Report No. 20-N-0231
July 21, 2020
-------
Abbreviations
C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulations
CARES Act Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY Fiscal Year
GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office
IT Information Technology
OIG Office of Inspector General
OPM U.S. Office of Personnel Management
U.S.C. United States Code
Are you aware of fraud, waste or abuse in an
EPA program?
EPA Inspector General Hotline
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2431T)
Washington, D.C. 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, D.C. 20460
(202) 566-2391
www.epa.gov/oiq
Subscribe to our Email Updates
Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig
Send us your Project Suggestions
-------
.tftD S7/,. 20-N-0231
^ ^ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency juiv2i 2020
£
<
- » j July 21, 2020
\ Office of Inspector General
ag.i
At a Glance
CD
% PR0^0
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
July 21, 2020
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: EPA's FYs 2020-2021 Top Management Challenges
Report No. 20-N-0231
FROM: Sean W. O'Donnell
J?
TO:
Andrew Wheeler, Administrator
As required by the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, the Office of Inspector General is providing the
issues we consider to be the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's top management challenges.
The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, directs inspectors general to provide leadership to
agencies through audits, evaluations, and investigations, as well as additional analyses of agency
operations. According to the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRA stands for Government
Performance and Results Act), "major management challenges"—which we refer to as top management
challenges—are programs or management functions within or across agencies that have greater
vulnerability to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, where a failure to perform well could seriously
affect the ability of an agency or the federal government to achieve its mission or goals.
Annually, our office publicly reports on top management challenges, whereby we reassess the major
challenges that affect and influence EPA operations. The enclosed management challenges report reflects
findings and themes resulting from many such efforts conducted by the EPA OIG this past year. Drawing
high-level EPA attention to these key issues is an essential component of the OIG's mission. This report
summarizes what we consider to be the most serious management and performance challenges facing the
Agency. It also assesses the Agency's progress in addressing those challenges. This report and its findings
will be an important foundation for charting the path of future OIG audits and investigations.
For this report, the OIG conducted a survey of all EPA headquarters offices and discussed management
challenges in outreach meetings with Agency offices to request feedback on how these challenges affect
the EPA's business and operations. To develop this year's management challenges, we considered, among
other sources, information provided by the EPA in addition to the work of the OIG, the U.S. Government
Accountability Office, and public statements by EPA leaders to the press and Congress. These challenges
will guide our future assignments as we work to assist the EPA in achieving its goals to protect human
health and the environment.
In this report, we retained the management challenges that we identified in fiscal year 2019. We introduced
the challenge of responding to the coronavirus pandemic and other disasters, as well as an overarching
internal control challenge that encompasses program and regional office risk assessments, data quality,
and policies and procedures. We also introduced as a top management challenge the integration and
enhancement of environmental justice issues across the Agency and government. We would be pleased to
discuss these matters with you and address any questions you may have.
-------
EPA's FYs 2020-2021
Top Management Challenges
20-N-0231
Table of C
Challenges
1 Maintaining Operations During Pandemic and
Natural Disaster Responses 1
2 Complying with Key Internal Control Requirements 9
3 Overseeing States, Territories, and Tribes Responsible for
Implementing EPA Programs 15
4 Improving Workforce/Workload Analyses to Accomplish
EPA's Mission Efficiently and Effectively 20
5 Enhancing Information Technology Security to
Combat Cyberthreats 24
6 Communicating Risks to Allow the Public to Make
Informed Decisions About Its Health and the Environment 27
7 Fulfilling Mandated Reporting Requirements 32
8 Integrating and Leading Environmental Justice
Across the Agency and Government 34
-------
CHALLENGE: Maintaining Operations During Pandemic
and Natural Disaster Responses
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency must adapt to protect human health and
the environment amid the coronavirus pandemic and natural disasters. The Agency's
mission to protect human health and the environment comes into sharp focus as the Agency continues
to respond to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic—that is,
the SARS-CoV-2 virus and resultant COVID-19 disease. At
the same time, EPA response and support capabilities
need to be available to support natural disaster response
during the 2020 hurricane and wildfire seasons. The
Agency's responsibilities for implementing federal
environmental laws also continue, even as resources and
capabilities shift throughout these overlapping events.
This cross-cutting challenge touches on other EPA management challenges, such as the EPA's oversight
of states, territories, and tribes; risk communication; and workforce analyses. This challenge also raises
new risks in monitoring preexisting contracting and grant funds, as well as those funds directly helping
to alleviate the crises.
Risk to EPA's Mission Achievement: Successful Implementation of Programs
Achieving the EPA's mission relies on effective implementation of federal environmental laws and
regulations, which are designed to protect human health and the environment. Appropriate
regulations and effective enforcement are key to combating and deterring violations of law, including
fraud.
Fraud Identification. Inspections of recent imports have identified products marketed with
unsubstantiated and dangerous claims of being able to protect against the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Companies are also fraudulently claiming that their products are approved or endorsed by the EPA or
contain EPA-approved disinfectants for use against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The prevalence of fraud
related to EPA programs and operations will most likely increase as fraudsters identify new ways to
exploit consumers frightened by the coronavirus pandemic. In an April 2020 news release, EPA
Administrator Andrew Wheeler stated that the EPA takes seriously its responsibility to protect
Americans from fraudulent surface disinfectants and that he has met with online retailers and others
to ask for their help in preventing imposter products from coming to market. The Office of Inspector
General's Office of Investigations has opened many cases involving fraudulent disinfectant products to
protect the integrity of the EPA's programs and the American people.
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention image)
20-N-0231
1
-------
Disinfectant Approval. One of the EPA's most immediate responses to the coronavirus pandemic has
involved approving disinfectants that can kill the SARS-CoV-2 virus on surfaces. The EPA has also
developed a list of products that are registered to destroy viruses known to be as difficult—if not more
difficult—to kill than the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In addition, to address pesticide supply chain shortages, the
EPA is temporarily allowing companies to change—without prior EPA approval, as is typically
required—the suppliers of certain active ingredients in approved products.
Regulatory Program Implementation. During the coronavirus pandemic, the EPA has made many
adjustments to programs and operations by, for example, issuing regulatory waivers and making
exceptions to regulatory requirements, policy, and internal controls. However, these adjustments
create new risks that the Agency will not identify or address noncompliance. The EPA has implemented
a temporary enforcement policy that curtails several routine regulatory monitoring and enforcement
activities during the coronavirus pandemic. In the face of these adaptations, the EPA must maintain a
robust regulatory and enforcement program to ensure environmentally protective practices and to
address environmental violations and deter noncompliance. Reduction in regulatory and enforcement
activity places the EPA's mission at greater risk and threatens the Agency's overall mission to protect
human health and the environment.
On May 20, 2020, Administrator Wheeler
testified before Congress that, since March
16, 2020, the Agency has opened 52
criminal enforcement cases, charged ten
defendants, concluded 122 civil
enforcement actions, initiated another 115
civil enforcement actions, secured $21.5
million in Superfund response
commitments, billed more than $20 million
in Superfund oversight costs, and attained
commitments from parties for cleanup of
68,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil
and water.1 However, we observed in a
March 31, 2020 interim report that the
EPA's enforcement activities and its resources for conducting routine regulatory enforcement work
have declined over time.2 In fact, based on our analysis of the information available in the Agency's
database, the number of civil administrative cases the EPA initiated continued the downward trend
that we observed in our interim report.
Program Oversight. As described in the management challenge "Overseeing States, Territories, and
Tribes Responsible for Implementing EPA Programs," states, territories, and tribes often act as the
1 Oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency, before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works,
116th Congress (2020) (statement of Andrew Wheeler, EPA administrator).
2 OIG, EPA's Compliance Monitoring Activities, Enforcement Actions, and Enforcement Results Generally Declined from Fiscal
Years 2006 Through 2018, Report No. 20-P-0131. March 31, 2020.
ENFORCEMENT MEASURE DECREASE
INSPECTIONS
ENFORCEMENT CASES INITIATED —- -152% •
- ENFORCEMENT CASES CONCLUDED —151%«
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS WITH INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 158% •
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS WITH PENALTIES - - —153% •
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS 148% ~
The EPA's enforcement measures decreased when comparing
FYs 2007 and 2018. (OIG graphic)
20-N-0231
2
-------
frontline implementers of federal environmental iaws on the EPA's behalf. As a result of the
coronavirus pandemic and natural disasters, these entities face financial and personnel challenges that
may limit their ability to adequately implement federal requirements. The OIG is reviewing the EPA's
ability to conduct emergency response during the coronavirus pandemic.3
In addition, during responses to natural disasters, the EPA and the Federal Emergency Management
Agency encounter not only personnel shortages, but also utility and infrastructure damage that may
render drinking water and wastewater treatment inoperable for a period of time.4 Infrastructure
damage inhibits the federal government's
ability to assess environmental conditions
and accurately communicate those
conditions to the public in a timely fashion.
The EPA has recognized this challenge,
emphasizing the additional pressure placed
on drinking water utilities during the
coronavirus pandemic. In a March 27, 2020
press release, Administrator Wheeler said,
"Having fully operational drinking water and
wastewater services is critical to containing
COVID-19 and protecting Americans from
other public health risks. Our nation's water
and wastewater employees are everyday
heroes who are on the frontline of
protecting human health and the An EPA response team meets for a safety briefing before
¦ i . . .... . assessing sites in Tampa, Florida. (EPA photo)
environment every single day. 5 Additional
planning, assistance, and oversight by the EPA is necessary to support states, territories, tribes, and
local utilities that are facing a strain on their resources amid the coronavirus pandemic and when
natural disasters hit. The OIG will review the EPA's assistance to tribal drinking water facilities in the
face of the coronavirus pandemic.6
Environmental Justice Considerations. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show
higher rates of hospitalization or death among non-Hispanic Black persons, Hispanics and Latinos, and
American Indians/Alaska Natives. On June 9, 2020, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on
Environment and Climate Change held a hearing titled "Pollution and Pandemics: COVID-19's
Disproportionate Impact on Environmental Justice Communities." The subcommittee agreed that
3 OIG Notification Memorandum, Survey of EPA On-Scene Coordinators arid Managers Regarding COVID-19, Project
No. QA&E-FY20-0240. June 15, 2020.
4 OIG, EPA Region 6 Quickly Assessed Water Infrastructure after Hurricane Harvey but Can Improve Emergency Outreach to
Disadvantaged Communities, Report No. 19-P-0236, July 16, 2019; and OIG, Region 4 Quickly Assessed Water Systems After
Hurricane Irma but Can Improve Emergency Preparedness, Report No. 20-P-0001, October 7, 2019.
5 EPA, "EPA Urges States to Support Drinking Water and Wastewater Operations during COVID-19," News Release.
March 27, 2020,
6 OIG Notification Memorandum, EPA's Oversight of Tribal Drinking Water Systems, Project No. QA&E-FY20-0044, May 29,
2020.
20-N-0231
3
-------
environmental justice is a priority highlighted by the coronavirus pandemic. One representative stated
that the EPA's deregulatory actions have left many communities wondering who will protect their
health and safety. Another representative added that pollution burdens can also have a
disproportionate impact on people with chronic underlying health problems and on disadvantaged
communities.
In April 2020, the EPA made grants available for public education, training, and emergency planning for
environmental justice communities—which are communities that can be disproportionately impacted
by negative environmental factors—across the country that have been impacted by the COVID-19
disease. Currently, the OIG is tracking environmental justice issues on several ongoing projects,
including our review of the EPA's implementation of Title VI, which prohibits recipients of federal
financial assistance from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin when
implementing programs and activities.7 More information can be found under the management
challenge "Integrating and Leading Environmental Justice Across the Agency and Government."
Contract Oversight. The OIG has consistently raised concerns about the EPA's oversight of contracts.
This oversight responsibility is complicated by new funds and requirements associated with the
government's response to the coronavirus pandemic. For example, the EPA faces a new challenge in
contract management as a result of Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
Act, known as the CARES Act. This Act authorizes—but does not require—agencies to reimburse
contractors the cost of paid leave for their personnel who are unable to access a government-
approved facility or telework because their jobs cannot be performed remotely. Our review of the
EPA's plans for implementation of Section 3610 found that the Office of Acquisition Solutions created
and provided detailed guidance to EPA contracting personnel and contractors related to
reimbursements under Section 3610. Two Office of Acquisition Solutions-issued guidance
documents—the Implementation Plan and the Contractor Supplemental Invoice Instructions—
specifically capture the purpose of and implementation steps for Section 3610. We did not find any
evidence that the EPA's guidance, as revised, was inconsistent with the statute.8
Paying contractors under the CARES Act may benefit the economy by keeping contractors and their
staff financially solvent. However, if the EPA makes the payments, it risks falling short of funds to meet
its mission requirements. The EPA has advised that funds for Section 3610 will come from program
offices, which impacts the current fiscal year's program funding. According to the EPA, no additional
funds have been provided by Congress to the Agency to reimburse contractors under the Act. Senior
resource officials for EPA program offices must therefore determine whether funds are available and
whether it is in the best interest of the government to reimburse contractors under a particular
contract.
7 OIG Notification Memorandum, Effectiveness of EPA's External Civil Rights Compliance Office in Determining Title VI
Compliance in Organizations Receiving EPA Funding (2nd notification), Project No. OA&E-FY19-Q357, February 13, 2020.
8 OIG, EPA's Initial Implementation of CARES Act Section 3610, Report No. 20-N-0202, June 29, 2020.
20-N-0231
4
-------
Risk Communication. We have
previously found that the EPA faces
challenges in communicating risks
to the public during natural
disasters. For example, despite
concerns about air quality and
other issues in the area of Houston,
Texas, after Hurricane Harvey, the
EPA did not adequately
communicate important
information so that all impacted
communities received it.9 In the
aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, the
EPA's emergency response staff
EPAHOAKY
\ LO UfU CHO CAC OOMG 06 NAT SAU thiIn TAI
HAULING HURRHUK-RELATED DEBRIS TO THE CUM
PONfB CM IA ACEW 105 EKDMSMK QUE Of H UN HUMAN Pi IAS AREAS
* tqw fmu-.rtfhr. »Jrtnjn H (ftws* amidtnu
CO CAl 06 DAC «J MAT SAU TRAH 8*0 (A ll BlKWG TAI CAC VIIMG CO THAM CM
Um tfcs <»: h«*«i tin iM * !l® tfuxw no* U> 16 M a Am ntonh hm
Kt^ in >9 ditrti flu»(n ui Si ptw») au M iiWps fl h#n a dw raiih
NHATLENCAC MANHDONAT
PICKING UP THE PIECES e»25
ho Irah Uf 3& to A did
Wn
~t ''
From left: English, Spanish, and Vietnamese versions of EPA flyers regarding
debris management. (EPA images)
stationed in Houston handed out pamphlets and responded to telephone calls; informed non-English-
speaking communities about issues including disposing of hazardous waste; and disinfected drinking
water and worked with septic systems after flooding. However, the regional staff did not provide all
residents in Houston-area communities sufficient quantities of translated pamphlets, including those in
Spanish.10
Other OIG reports have also identified risk communication as an Agency challenge, including a
March 2020 management alert on ethylene oxide-emitting facilities.11 The issues we identified in that
alert may persist or increase in severity as
some of these facilities—particularly those
that provide medical sterilization services-
are further strained to address coronavirus
pandemic-related issues. The lessened
regulatory oversight noted above may
produce environmental or public health risks,
which may warrant additional communication
to affected communities. The continuing
challenge of communicating risk is described
more broadly in this report under the
management challenge "Communicating Risks
to Allow the Public to Make Informed Metropolitan areas in the United States where there is at least one
Decisions About Its Health and the census tract in which ethylene oxide is a significant risk driver for
^ J „ ' " cancer. (OIG-developed image based on the 2014 National Air
Environment. Toxics Assessment and information from the EPA)
• •• •
9 OIG, EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to Better Address Air Quality Concerns During Future Disasters, Report
No. 20-P-0062, December 16, 2019.
10 OIG, EPA Region 6 Quickly Assessed Water Infrastructure after Hurricane Harvey but Can Improve Emergency Outreach to
Disadvantaged Communities, Report No. 19-P-Q236, July 16, 2.019.
11 OIG, Management Alert: Prompt Action Needed to Inform Residents Living Near Ethylene Oxide-Emitting Facilities About
Health Concerns and Actions to Address Those Concerns, Report No. 20-N-0128. March 31, 2020.
20-N-0231
5
-------
Video providing background and findings regarding air quality and other issues in the Houston area after Hurricane Harvey.
(OIG video and imagery)
Risks to EPA's Operations: Maintaining a Safe and Productive Workforce
When executed, Continuity of Operations plans allow organizations to maintain required business
practices when normal operations are not prudent or possible. Including telework in the plan allows a
greater number of employees to continue working in those situations. However, navigating a new
environment where Continuity of Operations plans are implemented continuously for several months
creates new technological and operational challenges to achieve the EPA's mission and to keep its
workforce safe and productive.
Personal Protective Equipment Procurement and
Provision. As the Agency continues its work during the
coronavirus pandemic, it must ensure that its field
employees—inspectors, educators, on-scene coordinators,
and others—can protect their own safety and the safety of
those with whom they interact. This requires the EPA to
procure additional personal protective equipment and
adapt existing protocols. The OIG will review the EPA's
ability to coordinate emergency response during this time,
including whether equipment and other resources were
available for on-scene coordinators.12
Cybersecurity Enhancement. Cybersecurity is a continuing
EPA management challenge that has become more critical
during the coronavirus pandemic. Continuing EPA
12 OIG Notification Memorandum, Survey of EPA On-Scene Coordinators arid Managers Regarding COVID-19, Project
No. QA&E-FY20-024Q. June 16, 2020.
Personal protective equipment at the National
Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in Ann
Arbor, Michigan. (EPA photo)
20-N-0231
-------
operations in the face of the coronavirus pandemic has required the Agency to adapt its network to
support a primarily virtual workforce and provide an unprecedented number of remote employees
with a reliable, stable means to communicate and access critical applications and data. Information
technology help-desk functions can be delayed by an overtaxed IT staff, who must now also deploy and
manage new tools and technology.
Unprecedented levels of remote access also increase the risk of security breaches of remotely stored
and transmitted data, as well as the introduction of malicious software to the Agency network. In
addition, the number of remote employees working at the same time may overtax the information
system capacity levels. OIG reviews of the Agency's compliance with the Federal Information Security
Modernization Act of 2014 and with the Federal System Security Plan requirements will include
determinations of how the Agency's activities have accounted for the challenges raised by the
coronavirus pandemic.13 The continuing challenge of communicating this risk is described more broadly
in this report under the management challenge "Enhancing Information Technology Security to
Combat Cyberthreats."
Safe Return to Facilities. The EPA will need to keep its facilities clean, promote social distancing, and
follow protection protocols so that its workforce is safe. Per the associate deputy administrator in a
July 16, 2020 email, the EPA has 125 EPA facilities across the country. The federal government has
established requirements for returning the federal workforce to its facilities safely, and the EPA began
implementing these practices in some locations as early as late May 2020. The OIG will review the
EPA's plans for personnel reentering office buildings.14
Left to right: EPA office door. Employees gathered outside an EPA headquarters building entrance. (EPA photos)
13 OIG Notification Memorandum, FY2020 EPA's Compliance with the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of
2.014, Project No, QA&E-FY20-0033, May 5, 2.020; OIG, Evaluation of EPA's Information Systems' Compliance with Federal
System Security Plans Requirements (2nd notification), Project No. OA&E-FY2Q-Q176, May 6, 2020.
14 OIG Notification Memorandum, EPA's Strategies to Comply with Federal Guidelines for Reopening Facilities Closed Due to
the Coronavirus Pandemic, Project No. OA&E-FY2Q-Q241. July 1, 2020.
20-N-0231
7
-------
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
The EPA is addressing each challenge described above. To determine the effectiveness of the EPA's
activities, the OIG is tracking and reviewing EPA responses to the coronavirus pandemic and assessing
the risks of the EPA's emerging and existing activities to address the pandemic. For example, we
initiated a broad research project to assess the EPA's activities across the country, and we began a
project designed to broadly review the Agency's internal control activities under the CARES Act.15
15 OIG Notification Memorandum, Research for Future Audits and Evaluations Regarding Effects of Coronavirus Pandemic
(SARS-CoV-2 Virus and COVID-19 Disease) on EPA Programs and Operations, Project No. QA&E-FY20-0212, May 7, 2020;
OIG Notification Memorandum, Internal Controls Established to Implement Programs and Activities Funded under the CARES
Act, Project No. QA&E-FY20-0234. June 10, 2020.
20-N-0231
8
-------
CHALLENGE: Complying with Key Internal Control
Requirements
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
Effective internal controls are needed to achieve the Agency's mission and goals. The
EPA's mission is to protect human health and the environment. To achieve that mission, the EPA
established three goals:
1. A cleaner, healthier environment.
2. More effective partnerships with EPA stakeholders.
3. Greater certainty, compliance, and effectiveness.16
The road to achieving these goals requires effective and efficient implementation of hundreds of EPA
programs, projects, and laws. The federal government has rules in place designed to give programs the
best chance to achieve their objectives.17 The establishment and review of internal controls enable the
Agency to continuously improve programs and
achieve program outcomes for the good of the
American public.
Agencies are expected to comply with internal
control standards, which are designed to help
them achieve their goals. Robust internal controls provide reasonable assurance that (1) programs
achieve their intended results; (2) resources are used in a manner consistent with the Agency's
mission; (3) programs and resources are protected from waste, fraud, and mismanagement; (4) laws
and regulations are followed; and (5) reliable and timely information is obtained, maintained,
reported, and used for decision-making.
To improve agency internal controls, the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act of 1982 requires the
comptroller general to issue Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government.18, These
standards establish five components that provide the overall
framework for establishing and maintaining an effective internal
control system. These five components cover all aspects of an
entity's objectives. Annually, in conformance with the Act, EPA
program offices and regions issue statements of assurance that
indicate compliance with the requirements.19 However, the EPA's
INTERNAL'
CONTROLS^
A
iA k
10
o
3a
Objective
Controls
Controls
Objective
identified
designed
in place
achieved
Source: GAO.
Five Components of Internal Control
1. Control Environment
2. Risk Assessment
3. Control Activities
4. Information and Communication
5. Monitoring
16 EPA, Working Together: FY2018-2022 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan, February 2018 (Updated September 2019).
17 Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-123, Management's Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and
Internal Controls, July 16, 2016.
18 31 U.S.C. § 3512(c).
19 The U.S. Government Accountability Office's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, also referred to as
the Green Book, is constructed around Office of Management and Budget Circular A-123.
20-N-0231
9
-------
programs lack key elements in three out of the five key internal controls: risk assessment, control
activities, and information and communication. Without these key components, the EPA risks falling
short of achieving Agency and program goals.
Consistently Assessing Program Risks
In its FY 2019 statements of assurance, the EPA stated that it had complied with the risk assessment
requirements; however, our recent work shows that those statements are inaccurate. In a May 2020
OIG report, we found that the EPA was not conducting risk assessments for 20 programs that
collectively cost over $5.7 billion in FY 2018. Without these risk assessments, the EPA cannot be certain
it has the proper procedures in place to address internal and external risks to these programs.20
Internal Control Component 2:
Risk Assessment
The agency is better able to protect
operations from fraud, waste,
abuse, and mismanagement when
it knows the risks and develops plan
to mitigate those risks.
This component of internal control provides the basis for
developing appropriate risk responses. Management assesses the
risks the entity faces from both external and internal sources.
Federal agencies are better able to protect operations from fraud,
waste, abuse, and mismanagement when it knows the risks and
develops plans to mitigate those risks. Specifically, when agency
risks are not disclosed, other components of internal control may
falter. Without adequate risk assessments, agencies cannot:
• Clearly plan and execute the oversight and management of the control environment.
• Determine whether control activities are appropriate and sufficient.
• Determine whether the information and communication are accurate.
• Determine whether adequate monitoring is taking place.
Improving Controls Over Policies and Procedures
The EPA lacks a systematic process for regularly assessing the need for policy and procedure updates.
In its 2019 Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act letter, the EPA's Office of the Chief Financial
Officer stated, "Many of the Agency's policies, procedures, and
internal controls which cut across payroll, time and attendance,
and human resources functions are in need of review and
revision." The EPA strategic plan—specifically Objective 3.5,
"Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness" under the goal of
"Greater Certainty, Compliance, and Effectiveness"—discusses
how the EPA will work to alleviate challenges associated with
outdated or nonexistent policies. To ensure that the EPA is
achieving its goals and objectives and to prevent fraud, waste,
and abuse, the process of updating policies and procedures must evolve for the EPA to improve upon
business processes and operations to promote transparency, efficiency, and effectiveness.
Internal Control Component 3:
Control Activities
Control activities establish the
policies, procedures, and practices
required to respond to risks in agency
programs. Policies and procedures
should be based on agency risks and
include steps to mitigate those risks.
20 OIG, EPA Needs to Conduct Risk Assessments When Designing and Implementing Programs, Report No. 20-P-0170,
May 18, 2020.
20-N-0231
10
-------
Our work continues to identify weaknesses in the Agency's updating of policies and procedures.21 In
2019, we recommended updating the travel policy, the Freedom of Information Act policy, and the EPA
Leave Manual. We also recommended that the EPA revise the Recognition Policy and Procedures
Manual. Our 2018 reports recommended that the Agency update human resources policies and
develop an accurate and consistent policy and procedure for its debt waiver process. A 2020 report
reiterated issues with the Agency's ability to address debt waivers.22
The Agency also continues to face challenges with time-and-attendance processes. To properly
administer and report time-and-attendance data, agencies should have internal controls in place that
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are accurate and properly approved. Proper recording
of time-and-attendance information refers to whether the information is complete, accurate, valid,
and in compliance with applicable requirements. While the EPA has implemented corrective actions to
improve those processes, our ongoing audit and investigative work continues to highlight such Agency
weaknesses and vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities stem from ineffective and outdated internal
controls that allow employees to input—and managers to approve—time-and-attendance data that
are incorrect or contrary to Agency policy. Subsequently, some employees have received improper
payments, made untimely corrections to time-and-attendance data, or inappropriately charged the
wrong leave category. We have identified unauthorized overtime charges, salary overpayments, and
individual abuses related to employee time-and-attendance through our audit and investigative work.
In December 2019, we issued an internal control deficiency memorandum, Time and Attendance
Records Not Updated Prior to Payroll Certification Causing Salary Overpayments, to the Office of the
Controller. We identified 13 employees who received debt notices because their timekeepers and
supervisors were not adjusting the employees' time-and-attendance data prior to payroll certification
when the employees' were absent or unable to do so. In all cases, the 13 employees originally
submitted their time-and-attendance data for the pay period as being in a paid status; however, the
employees did not work their complete schedule and their time-and-attendance data were not
updated or corrected prior to payroll certification. As a result, the employees received salary
overpayments.
21 This applies to the following OIG reports:
• EPA Needs to Improve Management and Monitoring of Time-Off Awards, Report No. 20-P-0065, December 30, 2019.
• Outdated EPA Leave Manual and Control Weaknesses Caused Irregularities in the Office of Air and Radiation's
Timekeeping Practices, Report No. 20-P-0063, December 19, 2019.
• Follow-Up Audit: EPA Took Steps to Improve Records Management, Report No. 19-P-0283, August 27, 2019.
• Actions Needed to Strengthen Controls over the EPA Administrator's and Associated Staff's Travel, Report
No. 19-P-0155, May 16, 2019.
• Management Alert: EPA Oversight of Employee Debt Waiver Process Needs Immediate Attention, Report
No. 18-P-0250, September 12, 2018.
• Operational Efficiencies ofEPA's Human Resources Shared Service Centers Not Measured, Report No. 18-P-0207,
May 31, 2018.
22 OIG, EPA's Office of the Chief Financial Officer Lacks Authority to Make Decisions on Employee-Debt Waiver Requests,
Report No. 20-P-0194. June 15, 2020.
20-N-0231
11
-------
Internal Control Component 4:
Information and Communication
Management needs quality data to
make program decisions and
measure progress. Effective
information and communication are
vital for an entity to achieve its goals.
It is critical that the EPA establishes and follows up-to-date policies and procedures to mitigate Agency
risks. Not doing so may lead managers to implement individual interpretations of federal guidance and
policies, thereby creating inefficiencies and increasing the opportunity for fraud, waste, abuse, or
mismanagement. Operating with outdated policies and procedures can lead to Agency efforts that are
not aligned with its mission and goals.
Improving the Quality of Data Collected and Used for Program Decision-Making
We found that the EPA has not fully implemented internal controls for the mandatory EPA Quality
Program.23 The primary goal of the program is to ensure that the Agency's environmental decisions are
supported by data of known and documented quality. The lack
of controls within the Quality Program reduces the EPA's
effectiveness in overseeing programs, making needed
management decisions that directly impact public health,
preventing significant financial and legal risks, and ultimately
achieving its strategic goals. Per the GPRA Modernization Act of
2010,24 agencies must describe how they will ensure the
accuracy and reliability of data used to measure progress toward
performance goals. To this end, the EPA has implemented policy and procedural guidance titled
Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity, of Information
Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA's strategic plan Goal 3, "Greater Certainty, Compliance, and Effectiveness," recognizes that
"Environmental decision making across media programs requires access to high-quality data and
analytics." To accomplish this, the EPA plans to reduce reporting burden for submitting entities and
improve data quality by having Agency programs, states, and tribes establish shared information
services and agree to common standards and practices. Without these standardized business
processes, the EPA concedes that it cannot achieve its goals.
OIG reports show that poor data quality and data gaps negatively impact
the EPA's effectiveness in overseeing programs that directly impact public
health, such as managing air quality, drinking water, toxic releases to
surface waters, Superfund sites, and environmental education. Data quality
issues and data gaps also subject the EPA to significant financial risks and
delayed cleanups, while the public sustains prolonged exposure to unsafe ^aps^OlG^mage)01^3
substances and restrictions on the use of natural resources. Specifically:
• We found that the EPA's Regions did not correctly track responsible parties for cleanups,
compliance, or significant noncompliance with enforcement agreements or orders at Superfund
hazardous waste cleanup sites. As a result, EPA headquarters could not consistently enforce
23 OIG, EPA Needs to Address Internal Control Deficiencies in the Agencywide Quality System, Report No. 20-P-0200, June 22,
2020.
24 ii.
GPRA" stands for Government Performance and Results Act.
20-N-0231
12
-------
requirements for cleanup parties across the nation, nor could the EPA create or maintain a level
playing field. Further, headquarters could not assess the adequacy of regional actions against
noncompliant cleanup parties and assist when appropriate.25
• In a 2017 audit, we found that the Toxics Release Inventory and
the Discharge Monitoring Report Comparison Dashboard had
limited utility for identifying possible surface water dischargers.
Without this information, the EPA's ability to regulate facilities is
limited. Further, the EPA's Pollutant Loading Tool could not
identify unpermitted dischargers to surface water based on
Toxics Release Inventory data, which means that the EPA and
public cannot know when or how much pollution occurs from
those dischargers.26
• In a 2018 audit, we found that the EPA lacked data to determine
the effectiveness of state-enhanced vehicle inspection and
maintenance programs. Nine states operating enhanced
programs did not conduct the required biennial program
evaluations to assess the effectiveness of their programs in
reducing vehicle emissions. Another four states did not conduct
required on-road testing to obtain information on performance
of in-use vehicles, and three states did not conduct required
reviews and tests due to a lack of clarity in EPA guidance.27
• The EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs did not have outcome measures to determine how well
the emergency exemption process maintains human health and environmental safeguards. The
office also did not have comprehensive interna! controls to manage the emergency exemption
data that it collects or consistently communicate that data with its stakeholders. Although the
office collected human health and environmental data through its emergency exemption
application process, it did not make those data available in its publicly accessible database or
use the data to support outcome-based performance measures that capture the scope of each
exemption or measure benefits or risks.28
Image of a 2005 fire at EQ
Resource Recovery Inc. in
Romulus, Michigan. (EPA photo)
Vehicles idled in dense traffic.
(EPA photo)
25 OIG, While EPA Regions Enforce at Six Superfund Sites Reviewed, Four of Those Sites Remain in Significant Noncompliance,
and Nationwide Reporting and Tracking Can Be Improved, Report No. 20-P-QQ11, October 24, 2019.
26 OIG, Analysis of Toxics Release Inventory Data Identifies Few Noncompliant Facilities, Report No. 18-P-0001, October 5,
2017.
27 OIG, Collecting Additional Performance Data from States Would Help EPA Better Assess the Effectiveness of Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Programs, Report No. 18-P-0283. September 25, 2018.
28 OIG, Measures and Management Controls Needed to Improve EPA's Pesticide Emergency Exemption Process, Report
No. 18-P-0281, September 25, 2018.
20-N-0231
13
-------
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
Risk Assessment. In response to our May 2020 report on risk assessments (Report No. 20-P-0170). the
OCFO stated that it will revise and update the senior managers' and management integrity advisors'
online training courses to include relevant information on the GAO's Green Book by December 30,
2020. The OCFO also stated that it will require assistant administrators and regional administrators to
certify in their annual assurance letters by August 30, 2021, that all appropriate staff have taken the
training. As the EPA risk assessment process matures, it will be better able to identify and mitigate risks
to operations. The OIG will monitor the EPA's implementation of the risk assessment process. The
annual EPA risk assessments should also consider the risks posed by the OIG-identified management
challenges.
Control Environment The Office of Mission Support's Office of Human Resources develops an annual
policy agenda based on several factors: (1) changes to law, regulations, and other authorities; (2)
senior management decisions; (3) OIG recommendations; and (4) customer feedback. Per the Office of
Human Resources, the policies are prioritized, progress on each policy is tracked, and senior
management is briefed on a regular basis.
While the EPA continues to implement OIG recommendations to update and improve its processes, our
audit and evaluation program continues to highlight Agency weaknesses and vulnerabilities in this
area. These vulnerabilities stem from existing policies and procedures that do not reflect current
operations or needs and that allow for activities that are incorrect or contrary to other Agency policies.
The EPA has been implementing some corrective actions in response to our recommendations.
However, many corrective actions are still pending. In response to our audits, the EPA stated that it has
an established process in place to identify priorities and updates pertaining to its policies and
procedures. Although progress has been made, updating existing policies remains an important
challenge. Agency management needs to commit to correcting ongoing problems with the EPA's
policies and procedures, including streamlining and formalizing the process, dedicating resources, and
making this management challenge a priority.
Information and Communication. EPA leadership needs to demonstrate commitment to verify the
quality of data and adequately fill data gaps. To demonstrate this commitment, the Agency should
have the people and processes in place to deploy Agency data policies and procedures across all
programs and to actively manage data to improve quality and completeness. While a move to
electronic reporting should ease the Agency's access to data and simplify reporting, the EPA still needs
to verify and validate electronically reported data to ensure accuracy, timeliness, and proper format.
Neither the EPA nor the OIG can fully assess the data quality or data gaps issues until the EPA executes
its shared information services and develops common standards and practices with its partners.
Ongoing and future OIG audits and evaluations will continue to review this issue and how it impacts
the EPA's strategic goals and issues, specifically as they relate to air, water, cleanup of hazardous waste
sites, and chemicals. These areas and others rely on quality data to achieve Agency objectives.
20-N-0231
14
-------
CHALLENGE: Overseeing States, Territories,
and Tribes Responsible for Implementing
EPA Programs
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
States, territories, and
tribes have assumed
of the delegable
environmental
authorities under
. federal law.
States, territories, and tribes are key partners in
executing the EPA's mission to protect human
health and the environment. The EPA authorizes
states and certain other entities like territories and tribal governments, collectively referred to as
"states," to implement many environmental laws—such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe
Drinking Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act—if they show that they have the
capacity to operate programs consistent with national standards. According to the EPA, states have
assumed more than 96 percent of the delegable authorities
under federal law.
When the EPA delegates authority for a program to a state,
the Agency retains oversight responsibility to provide
reasonable assurance that states continue to protect human
health and the environment. The EPA must monitor delegated
programs to ensure that state implementation meets
minimum federal standards. The EPA also retains authority to
enforce environmental laws when states do not take
appropriate enforcement. EPA headquarters and regional staff
perform a variety of formal and informal oversight activities;
however, there have been disparities in the effectiveness of
Source: OIG graphic. delegated programs.
Strategic Planning Emphasizes Effective EPA Oversight
The EPA's oversight of delegated programs is vital to ensure nationwide protection of human health
and the environment. Oversight of delegated programs is thus a key tenet of the FY 2018-2022
U.S. EPA Strategic Plan. The plan highlights ways in which the EPA is improving oversight of state
environmental programs, including:
• Approving local solutions such as implementation plans and emissions certification applications.
• Restating its oversight role as a coregulator.
• Working with local entities to ensure compliance with the law and establish consistency and
certainty for the regulated community.
The EPA updated the FY2018-2022 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan in September 2019. As it pertains to
oversight, the most significant change was to Goal 2, as shown in Table 1.
20-N-0231
15
-------
Table 1: Change in Goal 2 of FY2018-2022 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan
Original issuance
September 2019 update
Title
Cooperative federalism
More effective partnerships
Purpose
Rebalance the power between Washington
[D.C.] and the states to create tangible
environmental results for the American people.
Provide certainty to states, localities, tribal
nations, and the regulated community in
carrying out shared responsibilities and
communicating results to all Americans.
Source: EPA OIG analysis of original and revised versions of the FY 2018-2022 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan.
In addition, Administrator Wheeler issued an oversight memorandum titled Principles and Best
Practices for Oversight of Federal Environmental Programs Implemented by States and Tribes on
October 30, 2018. The memorandum aims to "provide certainty by setting expectations for state, tribal
and federal roles and responsibilities and ensuring decisions are made in a timely fashion."
External organizations and members of Congress have questioned the effectiveness of the
administrator's strategy based on declining state resources and examples of strained relationships
between the EPA and the states, and our audits and evaluations have shown that much remains to be
done to support effective implementation. The EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Assistant Administrator Susan Parker Bodine has said, "Our goal is to eliminate inefficient duplication
with state programs, and to direct federal resources to help achieve the Agency's core mission of
improving air quality, providing for clean and safe water, revitalizing land and preventing
contamination, and ensuring the safety of chemicals in the marketplace."29
Oversight Concerns Persist Across Programs
Overseeing delegated environmental programs is central to the EPA's core functions. Congress
designed most environmental statutes to be administered by state programs with robust federal
oversight. Both states and the EPA make difficult decisions to prioritize limited resources. The OIG and
the GAO continue to uncover issues with the EPA's oversight of state environmental programs. From
FYs 2016 through 2020, we have collectively issued at least 19 reports that show the continued
prevalence of the issue and the actions the EPA has taken or plans to take.
Safe Drinking Water Act Implementation. In 2018 and 2019, we identified multiple issues with state
implementation and oversight of drinking water programs. In a 2019 report, we found that the EPA
does not have complete and nationally consistent information from states about public water systems'
compliance with public notice requirements.30 As a result, the EPA cannot fully monitor compliance
and oversee the implementation of this program. In July 2018, we concluded that the circumstances
and response to the City of Flint, Michigan's drinking water contamination involved implementation
and oversight lapses at the EPA as well as at the state and city levels. Specifically, EPA Region 5 did not
29 EPA, "EPA Announces 2019 Annual Environmental Enforcement Results," News Release, February 13, 2020.
30 OIG, EPA Must Improve Oversight of Notice to the Public on Drinking Water Risks to Better Protect Human Health, Report
No. 19-P-0318, September 25, 2019.
20-N-0231
16
-------
implement proper management controls that couid have facilitated more informed and proactive
decisions regarding the city's and state's implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act requirements,
such as the Lead and Copper Rule. Additionally, we found that the EPA did not fully employ its
authorities under the Safe Drinking Water Act to require compliance in Flint. As such, our 2018 report
recommended that the Agency implement a system for regional drinking water staff, managers, and
senior leaders that would incentivize staff to elevate and managers to address important and emerging
issues, in accordance with the EPA's January 2016 Policy on Elevation of Critical Environmental and
Public Health Issues.31
Flint River in Flint. Image links to "Further Insight on Flint" video. (OIG imagery and video)
In September 2018, the GAO also issued a report on state implementation and oversight of the
drinking water requirements surrounding lead and copper. The GAO reported that few of the largest
water systems had publicized inventories of lead services lines. Approximately 43 states informed the
EPA that they intend to fulfil! the Agency's request to work with water systems to publicize inventories
of lead service lines. However, 39 states reported challenges in doing so. The GAO's review found that,
as of January 2018, only 12 of the 100 largest water systems had publicized information on the
inventory of lead service lines. The Agency had not followed up with all states since 2016 to share
information about how to address these challenges. The EPA toid the GAO that it was focused on state
compliance with drinking water rules and not on following up with information on how states could
address challenges. To encourage states to be more transparent to the public and support the Agency's
oversight of the Lead and Copper Rule and objectives for safe drinking water, the GAO recommended
that the EPA share information on successful approaches it had used to identify and publicize locations
of lead service lines with all states.32 The EPA has since implemented corrective actions and the
recommendation is now closed.
31 OIG, Management Weaknesses Delayed Response to Flint Water Crisis, Report No. 18-P-0221, July 19, 2018;
OIG, Management Alert: Drinking Water Contamination in Flint, Michigan, Demonstrates a Need to Clarify EPA Authority to
Issue Emergency Orders to Protect the Public, Report No. 1.7-P-Q004, October 20, 2016.
32 GAO, DRINKING WATER: Approaches for Identifying Lead Service Lines Should Be Shared with All States, GAO-18-620,
September 2018.
20-N-0231
17
-------
Clean Air Act Implementation. We have identified issues with the
EPA's oversight of state air programs. In a 2019 report, we
concluded that Region 10 should improve its oversight activities to
provide reasonable assurance that air particulate matter emissions
testing programs conducted in the State of Washington meet
federal requirements. Although we only reviewed stack test reports
from Washington in EPA Region 10, EPA managers and staff
responsible for overseeing the Clean Air Act program at the national
level told us that they had observed similar problems in other states
and EPA regions.33
A smokestack. (EPA photo)
In a September 2018 report, we found that the
EPA should collect additional program
performance data to better assess the
effectiveness of states' enhanced inspection and
maintenance programs for reducing vehicle
emissions. Also, while the Agency strengthened
its oversight of required annual reports from
states about the performance of their vehicle
inspection and maintenance programs, it did not
consistently communicate errors in reports back
to states.34
Dense vehicular traffic in smog. (EPA photo)
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
We first reported this management challenge in FY 2008. Since then, the EPA has reviewed some of the
inconsistencies in its oversight of state programs. The Agency has also used federal enforcement
actions when states did not use their authority to protect human health and the environment. The EPA
continues to develop and implement policies to improve consistency in its oversight of delegated
programs. According to the Agency, the EPA has dedicated resources to address the oversight
management challenge. Actions taken include:
• Implementing a real-time permit review process for the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System under the Clean Water Act.
• Creating a standard operating procedure for Clean Air Act Title V programmatic reviews.
• Developing a national permitting oversight policy that is expected to be finalized during
FY 2020.
33 OIG, More Effective EPA Oversight Is Needed for Particulate Matter Emissions Compliance Testing, Report No. 19-P-Q251,
July 30, 2019.
34 OIG, Collecting Additional Performance Data from States Would Help EPA Better Assess the Effectiveness of Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Programs, Report No. 18-P-0283, September 25, 2018.
20-N-0231
18
-------
While the EPA's actions, its Strategic Plan, and policy documents acknowledge state oversight as a
legitimate management challenge, the Agency is not likely to fully meet this challenge in the near-term
because of resource limitations and the complexity of the issue. Oversight of states is central to the
EPA's mission. Our office has nine audits and evaluations related to this management challenge
ongoing in FY 2020, and we anticipate additional assignments in FY 2021 that address the EPA's
oversight of states.
20-N-0231
19
-------
CHALLENGE: Improving Workforce/Workload Analyses to
Accomplish EPA's Mission Efficiently and Effectively
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
Workforce planning affects the EPA's capability to achieve strategic goals and
objectives. The EPA has not yet executed the required workforce plan to ensure that the Agency is
well-staffed to achieve its goals and objectives of protecting human health and the environment.
Workforce planning is an essential task of government agencies, designed to systematically identify
and address the gaps between the workforce each agency has today and the one it needs to meet
future needs. Workforce planning requirements are issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel
Management and defined in 5 C.F.R. Part 250, Subpart B, Strategic Human Capital Management,
effective April 11, 2017. The GAO has also identified strategic human capital management as a high-risk
area. The GAO states that agencies need to take action to address mission-critical skills gaps within
their workforces—a significant factor contributing to many high-risk areas.
The OIG and the GAO have both reported that the EPA has not incorporated workload analysis into its
resource allocations. For example, in 2017, the OIG reported that the distribution of Superfund full-
time equivalents among EPA Regions did not support the current regional workload. The GAO also
reported in 2017 on EPA workload concerns.35
Significant EPA Workforce Trends. In its FY 2019 Human Capital Operating Plan, the EPA reports that
workforce levels declined by 2,447 full-time equivalents from FYs 2015 through 2018. In FY 2018, the
percentage of the EPA workforce eligible to retire was 24.1 percent. The EPA states that on average,
4.4 percent of employees retire each year; however, it must be prepared for a large segment of its
workforce to retire. In February 2020 testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee,
Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee, Administrator Wheeler articulated some of EPA's
concerns about workforce trends and some of the ways the EPA is responding:
Right now, as of today, 40 percent of our workforce is eligible to retire. That's why I
hired a new human resources director last year. I actually interviewed the candidate for
the human resources position, it was three or four levels below me. I was told that
administrators never interview human resource directors. I want to make sure we got
the hiring right for the EPA of the future.
The EPA can help address this issue through workforce planning and succession management.
35 OIG, EPA's Distribution of Superfund Human Resources Does Not Support Current Regional Workload, Report
No. 17-P-0397, September 19, 2017; GAO, GRANTS MANAGEMENT: EPA Partially Follows Leading Practices of Strategic
Workforce Planning and Could Take Additional Steps, GAO-17-144, January 2017.
20-N-0231
20
-------
Five Phases of Workforce Planning
The OPM set out five phases to workforce planning:
1. Set strategic direction.
2. Analyze workforce, identify skill gaps, and conduct workforce analysis.
3. Develop an action plan.
4. Implement the action plan.
5. Monitor, evaluate, and revise the action plan.
The EPA has not yet initiated many of these phases for developing a workforce plan. Due to the broad
implications for accomplishing the EPA's mission, we have included this management challenge since
2012.
Strategic human capital management has been on the GAO's High-Risk List since 2001.36 Skill gaps
across the federal government exist in areas vital to the EPA, such as science, engineering, acquisitions,
and cybersecurity. The Agency will be competing for talent with other federal agencies as well as the
private sector. This makes it even more critical that the EPA develop and execute workforce plans to
address competency gaps and implement succession plans before problems hinder the Agency's
mission.
Phase 1: Set Strategic Direction
The EPA set a strategy related to workforce planning in its strategic plan, which emphasizes that
sustainable resource levels and a strong workforce are critical to success. Under Objective 3.5,
"Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness," the EPA aims to provide proper leadership and internal
operations management to ensure that the Agency is fulfilling its mission. The Agency does not include
a long-term performance goal for workforce analysis, but it does discuss this important task:
EPA will ensure its workforce is positioned to accomplish the Agency's mission
effectively by providing access to quality training and development opportunities that
will improve staff's and managers' skills, knowledge, and performance, and prepare
them to capitalize on opportunities that advance progress. EPA will improve its
workforce planning and management, strengthen its Senior Executive Service, and focus
on developing and maintaining a highly skilled technical workforce.
The EPA ties this objective to its annual plans through the FY 2021 congressional budget justification. In
FY 2021, the EPA's congressional budget justification describes how the Agency will leverage workforce
planning dashboards to advance human capital priorities by giving managers a strategic view of
retirement eligibility, diversity information, occupational series, and grade levels. The dashboards
36 GAO, HIGH-RISK SERIES: Substantial Efforts Needed to Achieve Greater Progress on High-Risk Areas, GAO-19-157SP,
March 2019.
20-N-0231
21
-------
assist the EPA with succession planning by helping to identify workforce gaps due to anticipated
retirements and attrition trends.
The Agency's strategic and annual plans promise to assist the EPA with workforce planning, but they do
not include a comprehensive analysis or identify skills and gaps that would comprise an Agency
workforce analysis. Our work has found that the EPA has not fully implemented controls and a
methodology to determine workforce levels based upon analysis of the Agency's workload.
Phase 2: Analyze Workforce, Identify Skill Gaps, and Conduct Workforce Analysis
In the past, the EPA resisted performing an agencywide
workforce analysis, instead opting to perform targeted
workforce analyses. The OIG did not consider this approach
sufficient because of the limited nature of the analyses. In
2017, 5 C.F.R. Part 250 required agencies to develop a
Human Capital Operating Plan, which includes agencywide
workforce planning.
The EPA is taking steps to comply with the regulation. The
number of EPA employees is declining, with 4.4 percent of
employees retiring each year. The EPA workforce declined by 2,447 full-time equivalents between
2015 and 2018. In addition, more than 42 percent of current employees are eligible to retire by 2023.
According to a June 2018 article in Government Executive, the EPA has the second-greatest number of
federal employees eligible to retire by 2023.37 The Department of Housing and Urban Development
was first, with 44.6 percent who could retire in 2023. The EPA has an urgent need to identify skill gaps
that could result from these impending retirements; however, the EPA does not plan to identify the
gaps until FY 2021.
Phase 3: Develop an Action Plan
The Human Capital Operating Plan serves as a tool for
Agency leadership to set a clear path for achieving
stated human capital strategies, identifying and
securing resources, determining time frames and
measures to assess progress, and demonstrating how
each Human Capital Framework system is being
fulfilled. Agencies must update workforce planning and
other elements in their Human Capital Operating Plans
annually.
Phase 2 of workforce planning involves:
• Determining what the current workforce
resources are and how they will evolve
through turnover.
• Developing specifications for the kinds,
numbers, and location of workers and
managers needed to accomplish the
Agency's strategic requirements
• Determining what gaps exist between the
current and projected workforce needs.
Phase 3 of workforce planning involves
identifying strategies to close gaps, plans to
implement the strategies, and measures for
assessing strategic progress. These strategies
could include such things as recruiting, training
and retraining, restructuring organizations,
contracting out, succession planning, and
technological enhancements.
37 Williams, J. Robert, 'The Federal Agencies Where the Most Employees are Eligible to Retire," Government Executive,
June 18, 2018.
20-N-0231
22
-------
In October 2019, the OPM reviewed the EPA's Human Capital Operating Plan and identified both
required and recommended actions to improve the Agency's workforce planning.38 In response to the
OPM's review, the EPA provided a corrective action plan stating that it will finalize a workforce plan by
the fourth quarter of FY 2020. The EPA also plans to update the workforce plan in the second quarter
of FY 2021 to identify skill gaps and closure strategies for mission-critical occupations.
Phases 4 and 5: Implement, Monitor, Evaluate and Revise the Action Plan
In the absence of a current workforce plan, the EPA cannot implement a meaningful monitoring,
evaluation, and revision process. This final step will bring the workforce planning efforts to life and
enable the Agency to meaningfully reduce the risks it currently faces from talent shortfalls or
impending talent gaps. In March 2020, Administrator Wheeler told the House Appropriations
Committee that the EPA "did not receive enough funding from Congress to fully fund our [full-time
equivalent] ceiling of over 14,000 employees." However, without a workforce plan, it is difficult to
determine whether funding is indeed adequate and whether available funding goes to the highest
priority needs.
Phase 4 involves ensuring that human and fiscal
resources are in place, roles are understood, and
the necessary communication, marketing, and
coordination is occurring to execute the plan and
achieve the strategic objectives.
Phase 5 involves monitoring progress against
milestones, assessing for continuous
improvement purposes, and adjusting the plan to
make course corrections and address new
workforce issues.
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
The EPA stated that it will finalize a workforce plan by the fourth quarter of FY 2020. The EPA also plans
to update the workforce plan in the second quarter of FY 2021 to identify skill gaps and closure
strategies for mission-critical occupations. The EPA is in the early stages of compliance with OPM
requirements, and the OIG will continue to monitor the Agency's progress.
38 OPM, Agency Compliance and Evaluation, Human Capital Management Evaluation of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Headquarters, July 31-August 15, 2019, October 9, 2019. The OPM required the EPA to perform actions based on
5 C.F.R. Part 250 and recommended that the Agency follow certain best practices related to workforce planning.
20-N-0231
23
-------
CHALLENGE: Enhancing Information Technology Security
to Combat Cyberthreats
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
IDENTIFY
RECOVER
> J
4k «
PROTECT
»]
DETECT
Cybersecurity requirements provide essential
protections for EPA operations. Protecting EPA networks and
data is as important today as it was in 2001 when we first reported this issue as a management
challenge. The EPA's Office of Mission Support is primarily responsible for IT management. Securing
networks that connect to the internet is increasingly more challenging, with sophisticated attacks
taking place that affect all interconnected parties, including federal networks. Federal agencies need to
be vigilant in protecting their networks. Various federal agencies have had numerous attacks on their
systems, impacting at least 21.5 million individuals. To reduce these risks for EPA information systems,
the EPA needs to be vigilant in monitoring, establishing, and developing ways to mitigate long-range
emerging threats.39
The Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 governs cybersecurity for federal
government IT systems. The Act tasks each agency head with the responsibility for protecting agency
information security systems and preventing the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption,
modification, or destruction of information. The five federal agencies with a role in ensuring enterprise
cybersecurity and responding to cyber incidents are the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Federal Trade
Commission, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Secret Service, and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. These agencies play cross-cutting roles to support, monitor, or oversee the
implementation of cybersecurity practices. The Department of Homeland Security has the primary day-
to-day operational role in directing, assisting, and engaging with agencies to implement federal
cybersecurity measures.
Since the Act's standards have been put in place, the OIG has reported that the EPA continues to face a
challenge in implementing a vigorous cybersecurity program that strengthens its network defenses and
data security in a time of ever-increasing threats to federal government networks. Cybersecurity is
defined as the protection of internet-connected systems such as hardware, software, and data from
cyberthreats. Individuals and enterprises practice cybersecurity to protect against unauthorized access
to data centers and other computerized systems. The EPA has not fully implemented information
security. The EPA must achieve a strong baseline protection for its network and must focus on how to
manage evolving threats, increasing volumes of data, and remote access technologies.
39 The GAO has designated information security as a governmentwide high-risk area since 1997. It expanded this high-risk
area in 2003 to include protection of critical cyberinfrastructure and in 2015 to include protecting the privacy of personally
identifiable information.
20-N-0231
24
-------
EPA Needs a Process for Overseeing Information Security Programs
Despite continued progress, the EPA has not fully implemented information security throughout the
Agency. This area requires continued senior-level emphasis. The EPA relies heavily on program and
regional offices and contractor personnel to implement and manage configurations and operations of
Agency networked resources. The Agency needs oversight processes to monitor the performance of its
information security program and contractors. To assist this oversight, the OIG continuously examines
the EPA's use and control of operational resources.
Our audits have noted the need for improvements in many areas, including internal controls to ensure
EPA offices comply with required security requirements to protect system data. We reported that the
EPA needs to improve controls for implementing the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act and Pesticide Registration Improvement Act.40 Specifically, the EPA needs to strengthen
(1) automated controls for processing pesticide registration fees, (2) remediation of identified
vulnerabilities that could compromise the systems, and (3) database security controls to remove
unauthorized users of the system and install critical updates to the software to protect data.
Furthermore, our audits and GAO work continue to note that the EPA faces challenges in addressing
outstanding weaknesses within its information security program and in managing contractors that
provide key support in operating or managing Agency systems. In this regard, the EPA lacks controls to
ensure that responsible parties remediate known security weaknesses by Agency deadlines and that
these parties update the Agency's vulnerability management system so senior officials have an
agencywide perspective on threats to the EPA's network. Additionally, EPA senior officials are not
aware whether contractors with significant information security responsibilities are complying with
federal training requirements. Also, the EPA does not have processes to determine which contractors
require training and whether the training was completed.
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
To address these complex cybersecurity issues, the EPA has made significant strides in developing a
policy framework to enable IT systems to adhere to federal information security requirements. For
example, the EPA has developed extensive policies and procedures, as well as addressed a significant
portion of federal information security requirements and made them available to all headquarters and
regional offices. However, the EPA manages the implementation of this policy framework in a
decentralized manner. Our audit work also indicates that a lack of centralized oversight and reporting
prevents the Agency from realizing a fully implemented information security program capable of
effectively managing the remediation of known and emerging security threats.
In response to the FY 2019 management challenge report, the EPA indicated that the Agency is
committed to protecting its information and technology assets. The EPA reiterated that it recognizes
the prevalence and complexity of the ever-growing cybersecurity attacks and is aware of the impact on
40 OIG, Pesticide Registration Fee, Vulnerability Mitigation and Database Security Controls for EPA's FIFRA and PRIA Systems
Need Improvement, Report No. 19-P-0195, June 21, 2019.
20-N-0231
25
-------
the Agency's mission if information assets are
compromised. The EPA stated that the Agency has
established and implemented adequate processes
for monitoring and managing contractor support
actions to address concerns associated with this
management challenge. The EPA has taken steps to
address the OIG audit recommendations. However,
actions are still needed to address cybersecurity
challenges, as not all recommendations were
resolved when we issued the March 2020 report,
EPA Needs to Improve Its Risk Management and
Incident Response Information Security Functions.41
• Needs Improvement
Management
Level 1: Ad hoc
Level 2: Defined
• Needs Improvement •
Incident
Response
Level 3: Consistently Implemented
Level 4: Managed and Measurable
Level 5: Optimized
OIG assessment of the EPA's Federal Information Security
Modernization Act function areas and domains.
(EPA OIG graphic)
The EPA needs to take additional steps to enhance
cybersecurity. This includes consulting with
respective critical infrastructure sector partners, as appropriate, to develop methods for determining
the level and type of cybersecurity framework needed to protect entities within each critical
infrastructure sector. The EPA needs to develop the corrective actions and milestones to complete the
actions identified in the Office of Pesticide Programs' Pesticide Registration Improvement Act
Maintenance Fee Risk Assessment document and associated pian regarding the fee payment and
refund posting processes.
41 OIG, EPA. Needs to Improve Its Risk Management and Incident Response Information Security Functions, Report
No. 2Q-P-012Q, March 24, 2020.
20-N-0231
26
-------
CHALLENGE: Communicating Risks to Allow the
Public to Make Informed Decisions About Its
Health and the Environment
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
EPA risk communication is a vital component of
the EPA's mission of protecting public health and the environment. The QIG has identified
instances across water, air, land, and pesticide programs where the EPA needs more effective risk
communication strategies to guide, coordinate, and evaluate its communication efforts to convey
hazards. Environmental laws and regulations are designed to protect people from excess pollution, but
when the EPA learns that people are at risk of exposure to harmful pollutants, it is essential that the
risks are communicated to the public while they are being remediated. Without effective
communication to the public about risk, the public may not know about risks or may not have high-
quality information about how to protect themselves.
The EPA's mission to protect human
health and the environment includes
work to ensure that "[a]II parts of
society—communities, individuals,
businesses, and state, local and tribal
governments-have access to accurate
information sufficient to effectively
participate in managing human health
and environmental risks." From
FYs 2013 through 2020, the OIG has
identified issues with the EPA's actions
to inform the public of environmental
dangers. Citizens count on the EPA for
timely and accurate risk
communication messages—from risks
of exposure to ethylene oxide, to unsafe drinking water in Flint, to farmers working near pesticides.
The EPA has not established strategic goals or objectives directly addressing risk communication. The
success of the EPA's goals depends on timely and effective risk communication with the public.
Administrator Wheeler underscored risk communication as one of his top priorities in his July 2018
speech to EPA employees stating, "Risk communication goes to the heart of EPA's mission of protecting
public health and the environment. ... We must be able to speak with one voice and clearly explain to
the American people the relevant environmental and health risks that they face, that their families face
and that their children face."
pNGRlPELIGRO]
EPA authorized sign warning public of human health dangers. (EPA photo)
20-N-0231
27
-------
Communicating Water Pollution Risks
We have identified challenges that the EPA has in adequately communicating risks in surface and
drinking water to the public. Our audit report on Flint highlighted issues with risk communication
during a drinking water crisis. In April 2014, Flint's water system, which serves drinking water to a
population of nearly 100,000 residents, switched from purchasing treated water from the Detroit
Water and Sewerage Department (now called Great
Lakes Water Authority) to sourcing and treating its own
water supply from the Flint River. After Flint switched its
drinking water supply, inadequate treatment exposed
many of the residents to lead. Emergency authority was
available to the EPA to take actions to protect the public
from contamination. However, the EPA's
communication weaknesses regarding health risks in
Flint contributed to a delayed federal response to the
water contamination.42
We have also reported that the EPA does not have complete and nationally consistent information on
public drinking water systems' compliance with public notice requirement under the Safe Drinking
Water Act. As a result, the EPA does not know whether public water systems appropriately notify
consumers about drinking water problems and consumers do not know whether their drinking water
complies with health-based standards.43
In addition, our audit and evaluation work has found that some
subsistence fishers, including tribes, sport fishers, and other groups,
consumed large amounts of contaminated fish without having access to
adequate health warnings or fish advisories. Although most states and
some tribes had fish advisories in place, this information was often
confusing and complex, and it did not effectively reach the affected
segments of the population. Although the EPA's risk communication
guidance recommends evaluations of fish advisories, we found that fewer
than half of states, and no tribes, have evaluated the effectiveness of
their fish advisories. We recommended that the EPA take a stronger
leadership role under the Clean Water Act by working with states and tribes to ensure that effective
fish advisory information reaches all such segments of the population 44
42 OIG, Management Weaknesses Delayed Response to Flint Water Crisis, Report No. 18-P-Q2.21, July 19, 2018;
OIG,. Management Alert: Drinking Water Contamination in Flint, Michigan, Demonstrates a Need to Clarify EPA Authority to
Issue Emergency Orders to Protect the Public, Report No. 17 P-0004, October 20, 2016.
43 OIG, EPA Must Improve Oversight of Notice to the Public on Drinking Water Risks to Better Protect Human Health,
Report No. 19-P-0318, September 25, 2019,
44 OIG, EPA Needs to Provide Leadership and Better Guidance to Improve Fish Advisory Risk Communications,
Report No. 17-P-0174, April 12, 2017.
water PLan,
Flint Water Plant tower. (OIG photo)
attention
Oo NO**at ThiM FH*
Fish advisory sign. (EPA photo)
20-N-0231
28
-------
Furthermore, our work showed that, in the aftermath of
Hurricane Harvey, the EPA's emergency response staff
stationed in Houston handed out pamphlets, responded
to telephone helpline calls, and informed non-English-
speaking communities about issues related to
disinfecting drinking water and septic systems.
However, the regional staff did not provide all residents
in Houston-area communities sufficient quantities of
translated pamphlets, including those in Spanish,45
. . EPA and Texas Commission on Environmental
Communicating Land Contamination Risks Quality command posts in Houston, (epa photo)
The EPA faces challenges in communicating with residents about contaminated land. We found that
the EPA's Cleanups in My Community website did not contain updated risk information for the
Amphenol/Franklin Power Products site in Franklin, Indiana,46 which means that residents who visited
the website did not have current data about the risks in their communities.47 We identified a case
where bags of contaminated mine slag from the Anaconda Co. Smelter Superfund Site were being sold
or provided as souvenirs; this use of siag had not been approved by the EPA or the Montana
Department of Environmental Quality. Risk communication regarding the bags of slag was needed to
protect human health.48
Amphenol/Franklin Power Products site, Franklin, Indiana. Formation found at Anaconda Co, Smelter Superfund Site,
(OIG photo) Anaconda, Montana. (OIG photo)
We also determined that the EPA's risk communication regarding the unknown risks from the 352
identified pollutants in biosolids was not transparent on the EPA's website. The EPA's website, public
documents, and biosolids labels did not explain the full spectrum of pollutants in biosolids and the
45 OIG, EPA Region 6 Quickly Assessed Water Infrastructure after Hurricane Harvey but Can Improve Emergency Outreach to
Disadvantaged Communities, Report No. 19-P-02.36, July 16, 2019.
46 EPA website, Cleanups in My Community, last updated June 1, 2020.
47 OIG, Management Alert: Certain Risk Communication Information for Community Not Up to Date for Amphenol/Franklin
Power Products Site in Franklin, Indiana, Report No. 19-N-0217, June 27, 2019.
48 OIG, Management Alert: Unapproved Use of Slag at Anaconda Co. Smelter Superfund Site, Report No. 20-N-0030.
November 18, 2019.
20-N-0231
29
-------
uncertainty regarding their safety.
Without data to complete risk
assessments, the Agency cannot
determine whether land-applied
biosolids pollutants with incomplete
risk assessments are safe.49
The EPA's challenges in communicating
risk to vulnerable communities extend
to agricultural workers, as well. Over
two million agricultural workers and
pesticide handlers are protected by the
Agricultural Worker Protection
Standard requirements. The Worker
Protection Standard is intended to reduce exposure to pesticides and provide enhanced protection to
agricultural workers, pesticide handlers, and their families. We found that the state-led worker
protection standard outreach to stakeholders, under a cooperative agreement with the EPA, was
incomplete .50
Communicating Air Pollution Risks
In a March 2020 management alert on ethylene oxide-emitting facilities, we identified shortfalls in the
EPA's efforts to inform communities about these facilities. The EPA identified communities where
exposure to ethylene oxide emissions from 25 "high-priority" chemical plants and commercial
sterilizers could contribute to an elevated estimated lifetime cancer risk equal to or greater than 100 in
one million, a risk level that the EPA generally considers not sufficiently protective of health. While the
EPA or state personnel, or both, had met with residents living near nine of the 25 high-priority
facilities, communities near 16 facilities had yet to
be afforded public meetings or other direct
outreach to learn about the health risks and actions
being taken to address those risks.51
In a December 2019 report about the Agency's air
monitoring response to Hurricane Harvey, we found
that despite concerns about air quality and other
issues in the Houston area after the hurricane, the
EPA did not adequately communicate important
information so that all impacted communities
49 OIG, EPA. Unable to Assess the Impact of Hundreds of Unregulated Pollutants in Land-Applied Biosolids on Human Health
and the Environment, Report No. 19-P-QQ02, November 15, 2018.
50 OIG, EPA Needs to Evaluate the Impact of the Revised Agricultural Worker Protection Standard on Pesticide Exposure
Incidents, Report No. 18-P-0080, February 15, 2018.
51 OIG, Management Alert: Prompt Action Needed to Inform Residents Living Near Ethylene Oxide-Emitting Facilities About
Health Concerns and Actions to Address Those Concerns, Report No. 20 I I .'128. March 31, 2020.
Tilling soil and injecting biosolids into a farm field near Madison, Wisconsin.
OIG image and video clip.
Residential neighborhood in Houston with industrial
facilities in the background. (OIG photo)
20-N-0231
30
-------
received it. A lack of information hindered residents' ability to make informed and independent
decisions to protect their health. Community liaisons and organizations expressed concerns about the
lack of printed materials in languages other than English that are spoken in the Houston area.52
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
This is the second year the OIG has identified risk communication as a management challenge, and the
Agency has taken steps to improve its risk communication efforts:
• In November 2019, the Agency hired a senior risk communications advisor whose role is to
develop and coordinate consistent risk communication activities across the Agency. The advisor
will develop an Agency-level training program on risk communication for project managers, on-
scene coordinators, and community involvement coordinators, who frequently communicate
risk to the public.
• In September 2019, the Superfund program published risk communication guidance
document, titled Getting Risk Communication Right: Helping Communities Plan at Superfund
Sites. This guidance describes how the EPA is working to improve risk communication and
community involvement practices during the post-construction, long-term stewardship phase
of Superfund site remediation.
• The EPA's FYs 2018-2022 strategic plan discusses the importance of risk communication with
respect to radiation and states that the Agency will focus on education—including formal and
informal training—in the areas of health physics, radiation science, radiation risk
communications, and emergency response to fill existing and emerging gaps.
• The EPA hosted a National Leadership Summit to focus on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
in May 2018. The summit brought together state, tribal, and federal partners as well as key
stakeholders, including industry, utilities, congressional staff, and nongovernmental
organizations. The summit provided an opportunity to share information on ongoing efforts,
identify specific near-term actions, and address risk communication challenges.
Despite increased awareness of the importance of risk communication strategies, EPA leadership needs
to demonstrate an organizational commitment to correcting problems with such strategies, which are
intended to protect human health and the environment. To demonstrate this commitment, the Agency
should show that it has the proper resources and processes and has developed adequate risk
communication strategies. The EPA cannot fully achieve its mission and fulfill the administrator's priority
until it develops strategic goals, objectives, and management controls that explicitly address risk
communication so that the public can take action to protect itself from hazards.
52 OIG, EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to Better Address Air Quality Concerns During Future Disasters,
Report No. 20-P-0062, December 16, 2019.
20-N-0231
31
-------
CHALLENGE: Fulfilling Mandated Reporting
Requirements
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
Complying with mandatory reporting requirements is
essential to providing accountability and information about EPA programs to Congress
and the public. The EPA is responsible for submitting reports to Congress under several
environmental statutes. Examples include the quadrennial report to Congress required under the
Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act and the triennial report to Congress about
the renewable fuel standards program required under the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007. Mandated reports contain key program information for Congress, the administrator, and the
public and can inform future rulemaking and decision-making.
However, the EPA did not issue multiple required congressional reports, as evident in specific OIG
recommendations to fulfill legal reporting requirements. We first introduced this management challenge
in 2018, after we found that the EPA had failed to submit mandated reports to Congress and the public
in five environmental programs between 2010 and 2019. As stated in the GAO's Standards for Internal
Control in the Federal Government, reliable reporting with respect to the agency's programs, objectives,
and performance for both internal and external use is a fundamental component of internal control.
When the EPA does not fulfill requirements for statutorily mandated reports, it creates an
internal control weakness and the Agency is in violation of the law that requires it to
prepare and submit or publish that report. Not submitting required reports also leaves
stakeholders uninformed about the Agency's progress towards achieving specific program
goals, any challenges experienced during program implementation, and progress toward
achieving broader environmental and public health goals.
The Agency has said that it did not fulfill these reporting mandates because it viewed them as not the
best use of scarce resources, leading to specific recommendations from the OIG to fulfill legal reporting
requirements.
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
Each year, the Agency prepares a list of mandated reports it views as outdated or duplicative as part of
the budget process outlined in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-ll, Preparation,
Submission, and Execution of the Budget.53 In the FY 2021 budget cycle, the EPA identified 13 reports it
53 Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-ll, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget,
December 2019.
20-N-0231
32
-------
considered outdated or duplicative, including the reports about the Beaches Environmental Assessment
and Coastal Health Act and the conditional registration of pesticides required under Section 29 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The EPA informs congressional staff and committees
about these "outdated" or "duplicative" reports, as well as its justification for classifying them as such.
For the conditional registration of pesticides report, the EPA stated in its justification that the Agency
eliminated that report and has not completed such a report in over 20 years. However, absent
Congressional legislation to eliminate these reporting requirements, the EPA remains obligated to
provide them.
20-N-0231
33
-------
CHALLENGE: Integrating and Leading Environmental Justice
Across the Agency and Government
CHALLENGE FOR THE AGENCY
The EPA needs to enhance its consideration of environmental
justice across programs and regions and provide leadership in
this area for the federal government. Across the country, communities of low-income and
people of color live adjacent to heavily polluted industries or "hot spots" of chemical pollution. For
example, studies show that 70 percent of hazardous waste sites officially listed on the National
Priorities List under Superfund are located within one mile of federally assisted housing.54 These
communities bear a disproportionate burden of environmental hazards. In 1994, President Bill Clinton
signed Executive Order 12898 requiring federal agencies to:
[M]ake achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations.
On June 30, 2020, Administrator Wheeler reaffirmed the EPA's commitment to environmental justice,
stating that the "EPA works day in and day out to provide clean air, water and land, with a particular
focus on environmental justice."55
The EPA defines environmental justice as "the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people
regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies." Integration of environmental
justice principles into all EPA programs and across all regions is necessary to promote environmental
justice and to achieve environmental equity across all communities.
Over the past ten years, the OIG and the GAO have consistently found that the EPA needs to improve
its execution of environmental laws and regulations in communities that are disproportionately
impacted by negative environmental factors. Environmental justice implementation and oversight
remain a significant management challenge for the Agency's ability to adequately protect human
health.
To effectively integrate environmental justice across EPA programs, the Agency should focus on
strengthening its federal leadership role; continuing to build and employ an environmental justice
strategic plan, measures, and grant outreach programs; ensuring the development and
54 Shriver Center on Poverty Law and Earthjustice, Poisonous Homes: The Fight for Environmental Justice in Federally
Assisted Housing. June 2020.
55 EPA, 'Two Philadelphia Organizations Receive Funding to Support Environmental Justice Projects," News Release,
June 30, 2020.
20-N-0231
34
-------
implementation of a comprehensive, nationwide plan; and considering the impact of all activities on
environmental justice communities in actions revoked and taken by the Agency as a whole.
EPA Serves in Federal Leadership Role
The EPA is the chair of the Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice, established by
Executive Order 12898 to coordinate federal environmental justice efforts. In this role, the Agency has
both the opportunity and the responsibility to lead other federal government entities in their efforts to
fully implement environmental justice requirements.
In 2019, the GAO found that the EPA should strengthen its leadership role in the Interagency Working
Group on Environmental Justice. The GAO reported that, while many federal agencies did not establish
plans, measures, or consistent reports on their environmental justice activities, the EPA has developed
and maintained environmental justice strategic plans, established performance measures to track
progress in implementing those plans, and reported progress toward achieving the measures.56
However, the GAO recommended that the EPA develop or help develop guidance for other federal
agencies on what to include in environmental justice strategic plans and how to assess progress toward
environmental justice goals. It also recommended that the EPA establish strategic goals for the federal
government's environmental justice efforts in its own organizational documents and update a
memorandum of understanding to renew other federal agencies' commitments to the Interagency
Working Group. The EPA agreed to all the recommendations, except for establishing strategic goals for
the federal government in its own organizational documents. The EPA countered that these goals could
be established through other actions.
The EPA's strategic plan for environmental justice, called the EJ 2020 Action Agenda, provides plans
and performance measures for attaining its goals and objectives. However, the strategic plan does not
always provide specific goals for its measures. For example, one of the measures in the EJ 2020 Action
Agenda states that the "EPA will offer [environmental justice] training to all state and local agencies
that are delegated/authorized to implement federal environmental laws," but it does not provide
details on how many trainings will be conducted.57 Further, the EPA's environmental justice annual
progress reports do not clearly convey the performance measures indicated in the strategic plan,
making it difficult to measure progress over time. The EPA is identified as the leader in environmental
justice across the government, but there are several critical ways it can improve its leadership and set
an example among its peers.
Strategic Plan, Measures, and Grant Outreach
The EPA created the Office of Environmental Equity within the Office of the Administrator in 1992 to
help integrate environmental justice into the EPA's work, cultivate strong partnerships to improve on-
56 GAO, Environmental Justice: Federal Efforts Need Better Planning, Coordination, and Methods to Assess Progress,
GAO-19-543. September 16, 2019.
57 EPA, EJ 2020 Action Agenda: The U.S. EPA's Environmental Justice Strategic Plan for 2016-2020, October 2016.
20-N-0231
35
-------
the-ground results, and chart a path forward to achieve better environmental outcomes and reduce
disparities in the nation's most overburdened communities. This office was subsequently renamed the
Office of Environmental Justice and, as of 2017, is housed in the EPA's Office of Policy within the Office
of the Administrator. The Office of Environmental Justice provides financial and technical assistance to
communities working constructively and collaboratively to address environmental justice issues. It also
works with local, state, and federal governments; tribal governments; community organizations;
business and industry; and academia to establish partnerships designed to protect all people from
environmental and health hazards, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income.
To accomplish its mission, the Office of Environmental Justice creates programs, policies, and activities
to assist communities in building their capacity to address environmental justice issues. These include
helping communities to engage federal agencies, so that the agencies understand environmental
justice issues and incorporate the communities' views into agency decisions, as well as providing tools
and resources to promote the principles of environmental justice. EPA Regions and the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance use several tools to identify which large facilities should be
inspected for air toxics, including EJSCREEN, which is an online mapping and analysis too! developed by
the Office of Environmental Justice to help integrate environmental justice into the Agency's work.58
Primar
PM25
Qzon-t
NAT*.Dt««4PU
NAT * Cancer Risk
NATa Neuron
NATA Respirator, HI
Traffic ProamAr
Leaa Paint macawr
RHP PronnWf
NPL Pronm*i
TSOFProorrn,
Water Dtscnargar Prtmmitj
Source: EJSCREEN v. 2.0 analysis conducted by the OIG.
Lack of Integration Across Programs and Regions
Despite being a federal leader in establishing plans and measures and in reporting on its environmental
justice efforts, the EPA has additional progress to make in integrating environmental justice concerns
across all programs and Regions. The Office of Environmental Justice is not alone in addressing
environmental justice in the Agency. The EPA's environmental justice mandate extends to Agency work
across all program and regional offices, including:
58 EPA, EPA Regions Have Considered Environmental Justice When Targeting Facilities for Air Toxics Inspections, Report
No. 15-P-0101, February 26, 2015.
20-N-0231
36
-------
• Setting standards and regulations.
• Facility permitting decisions.
• Grant awards.
• Reviews of proposed federal agency actions.
• Enforcement decisions.
Working to address environmental justice is also a key component of the "Overseeing States,
Territories, and Tribes Responsible for Implementing EPA Programs" management challenge.
Partnerships are an integral piece of the Agency's environmental justice program, particularly the
efforts of state, tribal, and local governments to advance environmental justice. Environmental justice
is also a key component of the FY 2020 management challenge "Maintaining Operations During
Pandemic and Natural Disaster Responses." For example, data from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention show that the COVID-19 disease has disproportionately impacted African American
mortality in many states.
OIG reports show that, with respect to environmental justice, gaps exist in almost all of the EPA's
activities, such as managing air quality, drinking water, toxic releases to surface waters, Superfund
sites, emergency response, and environmental education. These reports point to a systemic problem
with the Agency's ability to address environmental justice across all program offices. For the EPA to
effectively address environmental justice challenges nationwide, the Agency will need to develop
comprehensive environmental justice performance measures for all policies and programs.
In September 2015, we examined the content and implementation of the Agency's Guidance on
Considering Environmental Justice During the Development of Regulatory Actions, dated May 2015, and
identified deficiencies.59 Given that regulations carry the force and effect of law, they can have
substantial implications for policy implementation. Because of this, environmental justice should be a
key consideration in devising and promulgating regulations. Our 2015 report found that adherence to
the guidance was inconsistent and voluntary. In addition, we found that the guidance lacked measures
and controls to assess when and how it is used in rulemaking, limiting the EPA's ability to encourage
broad, consistent use throughout the Agency and to evaluate the guidance's impact on rulemaking.
Our work has indicated that the EPA continues to struggle with integrating environmental justice across
all programs and Regions. This struggle is particularly evident in the EPA's emergency response efforts
and in its oversight of delegated state programs. Several OIG reports have found that EPA regions
struggle with incorporating and considering environmental justice communities when identifying and
communicating risk. For example, in July 2018, we found that the residents of Flint were exposed to
lead in drinking water due to a delayed and inadequate federal response that failed to identify drinking
water risks.60 We recommended that the EPA implement a system to identify management risks in state
drinking water programs that includes environmental justice concerns, among other elements.
59 OIG, EPA Can Increase Impact of Environmental Justice on Agency Rulemaking by Meeting Commitments and Measuring
Adherence to Guidance, Report No. 15-P-0274, September 3, 2015.
60 OIG, Management Weaknesses Delayed Response to Flint Water Crisis, Report No. 18-P-0221, July 19, 2018.
20-N-0231
37
-------
We also issued two reports following Hurricane Harvey
that demonstrated weaknesses in Region 6's ability to
properly inform environmental justice communities of
air, floodwater, and drinking water risks.61 We found that
health risks to fenceline communities from emission
spikes related to Hurricane Harvey were unknown and
that public communication of air monitoring results after
Hurricane Harvey was limited. As a result, communities—
particularly fenceline and environmental justice
communities—were unaware of the health risks and data
results related to multiple facility startups and shutdowns
before, during, and after the hurricane. We
recommended that the EPA develop and implement a
plan to inform residents in fenceline and nearby
communities about adverse health risks resulting from
these activities and to limit their exposure to air toxics.
We also recommended environmental justice training be
conducted for staff who interact with the community, as
well as for those who lead the response efforts.
We found similar limitations with respect to the risks of
floodwater and drinking water after Hurricane Harvey.
Some affected communities did not receive some storm-
related human health and environmental information, or some of this information was not presented
in relevant languages, or both. This could have resulted in citizens lacking essential public safety
information. We found that improved outreach to these communities could improve the public health
of communities impacted by hurricanes and other disasters and enhance Region 6's emergency
response capabilities. We recommended that Region 6 personnel gather data on the population and
unique challenges of vulnerable communities, revise the pre-landfall hurricane plan to incorporate
environmental justice outreach, and provide outreach materials in all prevalent languages.
The OIG continues to assess the Agency's environmental justice activities across programs and Regions.
Three in-progress OIG projects will contribute to this work:
• Our civil rights work will address whether the EPA's External Civil Rights Compliance Office has
implemented an oversight system to provide reasonable assurance that organizations receiving
EPA funds comply with Title VI requirements, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race,
color, or national origin. This work will also address Title Vi compliance for all EPA
61 OIG, EPA Region 6 Quickly Assessed Water Infrastructure after Hurricane Harvey but Can Improve Emergency Outreach to
Disadvantaged Communities, Report No. 19-P-0236, July 16, 2019; OIG, EPA Needs to Improve Its Emergency Planning to
Better Address Air Quality Concerns During Future Disasters, Report No. 20- V 0062 December 16, 2019.
Known Air Toxic Releases Over Time
(8/20/2017through 9/20/2017) *3?'
—
Hoate: 08/20/17 9
Total Air Toxics Emitted:
0 tons
0 incidents
Legend
Video illustrating air toxic releases in geographic
areas and monitor methods used overtime.
(OIG video)
An aerial view of the flooding caused by Hurricane
Harvey in Houston on August 31, 2017.
(U.S. Department of Defense photo)
20-N-0231
38
-------
environmental programs, as requested by 22 U.S. senators in a November 22, 2019
congressional request.62
• As part of our ongoing work on the EPA's risk communication efforts, we held listening sessions
for community members near the USS Lead Superfund site in East Chicago, Indiana; the Coakley
Landfill Superfund site in North Hampton, New Hampshire; and the Amphenol Superfund site in
Franklin, Indiana. About 70 percent of the more than 1,300 Superfund sites across the country
are within one mile of public housing.63
• We are also evaluating the EPA's oversight of public water systems in Indian Country, including
how the Agency is providing safe drinking water to customers during the coronavirus
pandemic.64
THE AGENCY'S ACTIVITIES
The EPA has taken several actions over the past couple of years that threaten to reverse course on its
prior environmental justice efforts. Since 2017, the EPA's budget requests for its environmental justice
efforts have been significantly reduced from the $13.97 million requested in FY 2016 (Table 2).
Congress rejected the EPA's requests to defund the program and continued to provide funding to this
effort.
Table 2: Environmental justice budgets
FY
President's
budget
Enacted
budget
2016
$13.97 million
$6.74 million
2017
$0
$6.72 million
2018
$0
$6.69 million
\
2019
$2 million
$6.74 million
\ —¦
2020
$2.74 million
$9.55 million*
\—
2021
$2.73 million
Not available
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: OIG analysis and image.
*Reflects estimated enacted budget.
62 OIG Notification Memorandum, Effectiveness of EPA's External Civil Rights Compliance Office in Determining Title VI
Compliance in Organizations Receiving EPA Funding (2nd notification), Project No. OA&E-FY19-Q357, February 13, 2020.
63 OIG Notification Memorandum, Communication of Human Health Risks Posed by Sites in the Office of Land and
Emergency Management's Programs (2nd notification), Project No. OA&E-FY19-OQ31, February 4, 2019.
64 OIG Notification Memorandum, EPA's Oversight of Tribal Drinking Water Systems, Project No. QA&E-FY20-0044, May 29,
2020.
20-N-0231
39
-------
As demonstrated in Table 2, the EPA requested $2.73 million in environmental justice funding in the FY
2021 President's Budget, a $6.82 million reduction compared to the $9.55 million provided in the FY
2020 Enacted Budget. According to the FY 2021 Justification of Appropriation, the reduction:
[R]eflects a focus on providing financial assistance grants to community-based
organizations and technical assistance to low income, minority, and tribal/indigenous
populations. This change proposes to eliminate support for the EJ hotline, engagements
with vulnerable and overburdened communities, and EJ trainings.
A former EPA assistant associate administrator for environmental justice warned that budget cuts to
EPA's flagship environmental programs "will increase the public health impacts and decrease the
economic opportunities" in communities disproportionately affected by pollution and other
environmental harms.
According to the EPA's website, "Environmental justice will be achieved when everyone enjoys the
same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards and equal access to the decision-
making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, learn, and work."65 EPA leadership
needs to reaffirm its commitment to Executive Order 12898 by ensuring that environmental justice is
integrated into every program and regional office across the Agency. The EPA can make progress
toward implementing this Executive Order by proposing budgets that can obtain adequate resources
for its environmental justice and civil rights efforts, consistently integrating these principles into all
Agency activities, and providing leadership in its role as chair of the Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice.
65 EPA website. Learn about Environmental Justice, last updated on November 7, 2018.
20-N-0231
40
------- |