United States
Environmental Protection Agency
FISCAL YEAR 2022
Justification of Appropriation
Estimates for the Committee
on Appropriations
Tab 15: Appendix
May 2021
EPA-190-R-21-002	www.epa.gov/cj

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2022 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies	751
Air and Radiation Programs	751
Water Programs	755
Land and Emergency Management Programs	758
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Programs	764
International and Tribal Affairs Programs	770
Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance Programs	772
Mission Support Programs	772
The Administrator's Office	Ill
The Inspector General	778
Major Management Challenges	780
EPA User Fee Programs	792
Working Capital Fund	795
Acronyms for Statutory Authority	797
FY 2022 STAG Categorical Program Grants	801
Program Projects by Program Area	809
Eliminated Programs	819
Expected Benefits of E-Government Initiatives	820
Proposed FY 2022 Administrative Provisions	825
Attorney Fee and Cost Payments	829
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Plan	830
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet	833
FY 2022: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfer of Resources	834
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office	836
S. 2276 - Good Accounting Obligation in Government Act	840
On-Site Inspections and Off-site Compliance Monitoring Compliance Activities from
EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System	885
Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance (OECA) Travel Budget by Program Project
FY 2016 - FY 20221	887
FY 2022 Administrator's Priorities	888
749

-------
Evironmental Justice Allocated Budget

-------
COORDINATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
Air and Radiation Programs
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Implementation
EPA cooperates with other agencies to achieve goals related to ground level ozone and particulate
matter (PM), and to ensure the actions of other agencies are compatible with state plans for
attaining and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Agency
works closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USD A), Department of the Interior (DOI),
and Department of Defense (DOD) on issues such as prescribed burning at silviculture and
agricultural operations. EPA, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) also work with state and local agencies to integrate transportation
and air quality plans, reduce traffic congestion, and promote livable communities.
Air Quality in the Agricultural Sector
To improve EPA's understanding of environmental issues in the agricultural sector, the Agency
works with the USD A and others to improve air quality while supporting sustainable agriculture.
The collaborative approach to the agriculture sector includes scientific assessment, outreach and
education, and implementation/compliance.
Regional Haze
EPA works with the DOI, National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) in
implementing its regional haze program and operating the Interagency Monitoring of Protected
Visual Environments (IMPROVE) visibility monitoring network. The operation and analysis of
data produced by this air monitoring system is an example of the close coordination of efforts
between EPA and state and tribal governments. EPA also consults with the DOI's Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on potential endangered species issues.
Air Quality Assessment, Modeling, and Forecasting
For pollution assessments and transport, EPA works with the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) on technology transfer using satellite imagery. EPA further distributes
NASA satellite products and NOAA air quality forecast products to states, local agencies, and
tribes to provide a better understanding of daily air quality and to assist with air quality forecasting.
EPA works with NASA to develop a better understanding of PM formation using satellite data.
EPA also works with the Department of the Army on advancing emission measurement technology
and with NOAA for meteorological support for our modeling and monitoring efforts. EPA collects
real-time ozone and PM measurements from state and local agencies, which are used by both
NOAA and EPA to improve and verify Air Quality Forecast models.
751

-------
EPA's AirNow Program (the national real-time Air Quality Index reporting and forecasting
system) works with the National Weather Service (NWS) to coordinate NOAA air quality forecast
guidance with state and local agencies for air quality forecasting efforts and to render the NOAA
model output in EPA's Air Quality Index (AQI), which helps people determine appropriate air
quality protective behaviors. In wildfire situations, EPA and the USFS work closely with states to
deploy monitors and report monitoring information and other conditions on AirNow. The AirNow
Program also collaborates with the NPS and the USFS in collecting air quality monitoring
observations, in addition to over 130 state, local, and tribal air agency observations, and with
NASA in a project to incorporate satellite data with air quality observations.
EPA, the USD A, and the DOI established a collaborative framework to address issues pertaining
to wildland fire and air quality. The agreement recognizes the key roles of each agency, as well as
opportunities collaboration. For example, the partnership explains that the agencies seek to reduce
the impact of emissions from wildfires, especially catastrophic wildfires, and the impact of those
emissions on air quality. In addition, the partnership highlights opportunities for enhancing
coordination among the agencies through information sharing and consultation, collaboration on
tools and information resources, and working together to collaborate with state and other partners,
among others on strategic goals.
Mobile Sources
EPA works with the DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) on the
coordinated national program establishing standards to improve fuel efficiency for light-duty
vehicles. Specifically, EPA, in coordination with the DOT's fuel economy and fuel consumption
standards programs, implements vehicle and commercial truck greenhouse gas standards.
To address criteria pollutant emissions from marine and aircraft sources, EPA works
collaboratively with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), as well as with other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Coast
Guard (USCG) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). EPA also collaborates with the
USCG in the implementation of Emission Control Area (ECA) around the U.S., and with Mexico
and Canada in the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) to evaluate
the benefits of establishing a Mexican ECA.
To better understand the sources and causes of mobile source pollution, EPA works with the DOE
and DOT to fund applied research projects including transportation modeling projects. EPA also
works closely with the DOE on refinery cost modeling analyses to support clean fuel programs,
and coordinates with the DOE regarding fuel supply during emergency situations.
For mobile sources program outreach, the Agency participates in a collaborative effort with DOT's
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to educate the public and communities about
the impacts of transportation choices on traffic congestion, air quality, climate change, and human
health. These partnerships can involve policy assessments and toxic emission reduction strategies
in different regions of the country. EPA works with the DOE, DOT, and other agencies, as needed,
on the requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security
752

-------
Act of 2007, such as the Renewable Fuel Standard. EPA also has worked with other agencies on
biofuel topics through the Biomass Research and Development Institute.
To develop air pollutant emission factors and emission estimation algorithms for military aircraft,
ground equipment, and vehicles, EPA partners with the DOD. This partnership provides for the
joint undertaking of air-monitoring/emission factor research and regulatory implementation.
Air Toxics
EPA works closely with other health agencies such as the CDC, the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) on health risk characterization for both toxic and criteria air pollutants. The
Agency also contributes air quality data to the CDC's Environmental Public Health Tracking
Program, which is made publicly available and used by various public health agencies.
Addressing Transboundary Air Pollution
In developing regional and international air quality projects, and in working on regional
agreements, EPA works with the Department of State (DOS), NOAA, NASA, DOE, USD A, U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and with regional organizations. In addition, EPA has partnered with other organizations
and countries worldwide, including the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the
European Union (EU), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),
the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), the CEC, Canada, Mexico,
China, and Japan. EPA also partners with environment and public health officials and provides
technical assistance through UNEP to facilitate the development of air quality management
strategies to other major emitters and/or to key regional or sub-regional groupings of countries.
Stratospheric Ozone
EPA works closely with the DOS and other federal agencies in international negotiations among
Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, with the goal of
protecting the ozone layer and through managing ozone depleting substances (ODS) it controls.
EPA also supports several multinational environmental agreements to simultaneously protect the
ozone layer and climate system working closely with the DOS and other federal agencies,
including OMB, Office of Science Technology and Policy (OSTP), Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ), USD A, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Department of Commerce (DOC),
NOAA, and NASA.
EPA works with other agencies, including the Office of the United States Trade Representative
(USTR) and the Department of Commerce (DOC), to analyze potential trade implications in
stratospheric protection regulations that affect imports and exports. EPA has coordinated efforts
with the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of
Treasury (U.S. Treasury), and other agencies to curb the illegal importation of ODS.
Radiation and Radiation Preparedness and Response
753

-------
EPA works primarily with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), DOE, and the DHS on
multiple radiation-related issues. EPA has ongoing planning and guidance discussions with DHS
on emergency response activities, including exercises responding to nuclear related incidents. As
the regulator of DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), EPA is charged with coordinating with
DOE to ensure the facility is operating in compliance with EPA regulations. EPA is a member of
the Interagency Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force, established in the Energy
Policy Act, to improve the security of domestic radioactive sources. EPA also is a working member
of the interagency Nuclear Government Coordinating Council (NGCC), which coordinates across
government and the private sector on issues related to security, communications and emergency
management within the nuclear sector.
For emergency preparedness, EPA coordinates with other federal agencies through the Federal
Radiological Preparedness Coordinating Committee and the Advisory Team for Environment,
Food and Health which provides federal scientific advice and recommendations to state and local
decision makers, such as governors and mayors, during a radiological emergency. EPA participates
in planning and implementing exercises including radiological anti-terrorism activities with the
NRC, DOE, DOD, Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), and DHS.
EPA is a charter member and co-chairs the Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation
Standards (ISCORS), which was created at the direction of Congress. Through its activities,
member agencies are kept informed of cross-cutting issues related to radiation protection,
radioactive waste management, and emergency preparedness and response. ISCORS also helps
coordinate U.S. responses to radiation-related issues internationally.
During radiological emergencies, EPA works with expert members of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA). EPA also works with OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) on two
committees: the Radioactive Waste Management Committee (RWMC) and the Committee on
Radiation Protection and Public Health (CRPPH). Through participation on the CRPPH, EPA is
successful in bringing U.S. perspectives to international radiation protection policy.
Climate Change
To carry out a diverse range of regulatory and partnership programs to help tackle the climate
crisis, EPA works with a number of other federal agencies, including the Department of Energy
(DOE), the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), Department of State (DOS), the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID), the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC), and the Department of Transportation (DOT).
Climate protection partnership programs, government-wide, stimulate the development and use of
renewable energy technologies, energy efficient products, and other strategies that will help reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The effort is led by EPA and DOE with significant involvement
from the USD A, HUD, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
The Global Methane Initiative (GMI) is a U.S. led, international public-private partnership that
brings together over 40 partner governments and over 1,000 public and private sector organizations
754

-------
to advance methane recovery and use methane as a clean energy source. EPA works with the U.S.
State Department on the GMI, building on the success of EPA's domestic methane programs and
focusing on advancing methane reductions from agriculture, coal mines, landfills, oil and gas
systems, and municipal wastewater.
EPA also will support the State Department as the technical lead in developing projections and
compiling information on GHG mitigation policies and measures as part of the upcoming U.S.
Biennial Report and National Communication as required by the U.N. Framework Convention on
Climate Change.
Research Supporting the Air and Radiation Program
EPA continues to coordinate with other agencies, such as NOAA, DOE, USD A, National Institutes
of Health (NIH), and FHWA to develop sustainable approaches to manage risks from air pollution.
In addition, the FY 2022 President's Budget for EPA funds collaborative research in climate
adaptation and resilience with the new Advanced Research Projects Agency for Climate (ARPA-
C) that will be located within DOE. The ARPA model of high-risk, accelerated research is uniquely
meant to conduct R&D that, if successful, results in transformational technology advancements.
Water Programs
Collaboration with Public and Private Partners on Water Infrastructure Preparedness, Response
and Recovery
EPA coordinates with other federal agencies, primarily DHS, CDC, FDA, and DOD, on biological,
chemical, and radiological contaminants of high concern, and how to detect and respond to their
presence in drinking water and wastewater systems. EPA maintains a close linkage with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and DHS, particularly with respect to ensuring the timely
dissemination of threat information through existing communication networks. Additionally,
throughout the pandemic, EPA worked with DHS and other federal agencies to coordinate aspects
of information sharing, disseminate personal protective equipment, address shortages of treatment
chemicals, provide for equipment and qualified water system operators, and recognize water
system operators and associated contract personnel as critical workers.
EPA works with US ACE and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to refine
coordination processes among federal partners engaged in providing emergency response support
to the water sector, including maintaining clear roles and responsibilities under the National
Disaster Recovery Framework. EPA continues to work with FEMA, USACE, and other agencies,
on the Federal Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force regarding water resources and
floodplain management.
As the Agency in charge of water sector security, EPA works with DHS Cyber and Infrastructure
Security Agency (CISA) and other government agencies on the Industrial Control System (ICS)
working group to develop an ICS interagency Strategy and Implementation Plan. EPA also
755

-------
collaborates with CISA on various working groups and cybersecurity issues such as roles and
responsibilities, ICS supply chain, cyber workforce, cybersecurity standards, and cyber response.
Drinking Water Programs
EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established an Interagency Agreement to coordinate
activities and information exchange in the areas of unregulated contaminants occurrence, the
environmental relationships affecting contaminant occurrence, protection area delineation
methodology, and analytical methods. This effort improves the quality of information to support
risk management decision-making at all levels of government, generates valuable new data, and
eliminates potential redundancies. EPA also collaborates with the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) to develop strategies to decrease drinking water lead exposure in
homes. The partnership promotes the exchange of information, leverages funding, and reviews
processes to facilitate better-informed and coordinated decisions and investments.
EPA collaborates with DHHS to better understand, characterize, and manage public health risks
from Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs), with activities spanning from assessing CDC's
waterborne disease surveillance data related to legionella and other biofilm-related pathogens to
partnering with FDA on antibiotic resistance-related issues. EPA collaborates with multiple federal
agencies to address Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) issues including the DOD, the
Department of Energy (DOE), USD A, FDA, DHHS, the NIH, the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, the Small Business Administration (SBA), NASA, FAA, and OMB.
Infrastructure Support for Tribal Water Systems
EPA coordinates the multi-agency tribal Infrastructure Task Force (ITF), created to develop and
coordinate federal activities in delivering water infrastructure, wastewater infrastructure and
solid waste management services to tribal communities. The ITF is the formal mechanism for
interagency coordination among EPA, Indian Health Service, HUD, USD A, and the Bureau of
Indian Affairs.
Sustainable Rural Drinking and Wastewater Systems
EPA and USD A work together to increase the sustainability of rural drinking water and wastewater
systems to ensure the protection of public health, water quality, and sustainable communities. The
two agencies facilitate coordinated funding for infrastructure projects that aid in the compliance
of national drinking water and clean water regulations.
National Water Sector Workforce Development: Department of Veterans Affairs
EPA and Departments of Education, Interior, Agriculture, and Veterans Affairs (VA) are building
on existing collaborations, exploring new opportunities and actions, and identifying potential
additional federal programs and partners to support the nation's water sector professionals.
Coordination with Department of Defense on Analytical Methods for Detecting PFAS
756

-------
EPA's Clean Water Act (CWA) analytical methods program is collaborating with the DOD on
their efforts to develop an analytical method for detecting certain PFAS compounds in wastewater.
Source Water Protection and Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs)
To combat HABs and hypoxia, the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control
Amendments Act of 2014 (HABHRCA 2014, P.L. 113-124, recently reauthorized through the
National Integrated Drought Information System [HABHRCA 2017, Public Law 115-423])
emphasizes the mandate to advance the scientific understanding and ability to detect, predict,
control, mitigate, and respond to HABs and hypoxia. This legislation established the Interagency
Working Group on HABHRCA (IWG-HABHRCA) which tasked the group with coordinating and
convening federal agencies to discuss HAB and hypoxia events in the U.S., and to develop action
plans, reports, and assessments of these situations. The IWG-HABHRCA is co-chaired by
representatives from EPA, NOAA, and the OSTP, and it is composed of the following member
agencies and departments: CDC, FDA, NIEHS, USACE, USGS, BOEM, NPS, FWS, NASA,
USD A, DOS, and the National Science Foundation (NSF).
2018 Farm Bill Source Water Protection Provisions
EPA collaborates with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), state and
utility partners to develop implementation strategies and guidance to comply with the 2018 Farm
Bill provisions. These provisions dedicate at least 10 percent of total funds available for
conservation programs (with the exception of the Conservation Reserve Program) to be used for
source water protection. The Agency partners with NRCS to foster collaboration at the state and
local levels to identify priority source water protection areas in each state to address agriculture-
related impacts to drinking water sources. EPA also is collaborating with USFS in developing
strategies to implement the 2018 Farm Bill (Title VIII, Subtitle D, Section 8404) Source Water
Protection provisions requiring a "Water Source Protection Program" on National Forest Service
(NFS) lands. EPA is supporting USFS by fostering partnerships with state, utilities, and other water
stakeholders.
Source Water Collaborative
EPA participates in the Source Water Collaborative along with USDA (NRCS, Farm Service
Agency (FSA), USFS), USGS, and 25 other national organizations. The goal of the collaboration
is to protect sources of drinking water by combining the strengths and tools of its member
organizations. EPA provides funding to support these efforts.
Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS)
EPA participates in quarterly and ad hoc meetings with DOE, Department of Interior (DOI),
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Department of Transportation (DOT), and Department of Justice
(DOJ) to share information on carbon capture and storage developments. EPA serves as a liaison
to DOE's National Risk Assessment Partnership to advance its work in developing tools to
improve collective understanding of risk at CO2 storage projects and inform science and risk-based
decision-making at geologic sequestration projects; and to explore opportunities to integrate the
757

-------
partnership work into EPA's Class VI permitting process. EPA also will collaborate with DOE
and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) on several reports and other initiatives related
to carbon sequestration requested by Congress, including developing a report on Underground
Injection Control (UIC) Class VI permitting.
Research to Support Water Programs
While EPA is the federal agency mandated to ensure safe drinking water, other federal and non-
federal entities conduct research that complements EPA's research on priority contaminants in
drinking water. Cooperative research efforts have been ongoing with the American Water Works
Association, Water Research Foundation, and other stakeholders to coordinate drinking water
research where the private sector is conducting research in areas such as analytical methods,
treatment technologies, and the development and maintenance of water resources. EPA also has
worked with the USGS to evaluate performance of newly developed methods for measuring
microbes in potential drinking water sources.
Interagency coordination in research also is occurring in developing sediment criteria. Here, EPA
has joint research initiatives with NOAA and USGS for linking monitoring data and field study
information with available toxicity data and assessment models for developing sediment criteria.
EPA also conducts studies with the USGS to monitor the occurrence of CECs. Research efforts to
monitor the effects of chemical mixtures continue, increasing our understanding of wastewater
effluent impacts to human and aquatic health and prioritizing future research on developing
solutions for the removal of CECs in wastewater treatment operations.
Land and Emergency Management Programs
Brownfields
EPA's Brownfields and Land Revitalization Programs partner with the NPS's River, Trails and
Conservation Assistance Program to support Groundwork USA and individual Groundwork Trust
organizations in their efforts to engage youth in brownfields redevelopment and community
revitalization.
Superfund Remedial Program
The Superfund Remedial Program maintains ongoing coordination and collaboration with
ATSDR, NIEHS, HUD and USACE as well as with the Federal Mining Dialogue and the Federal
Remediation Technologies Roundtable, two multi-agency consortia. Interaction with these entities
enhances program implementation through activities that are mutually beneficial, such as
information sharing and resource leveraging. For example, ATSDR has a statutory mandate to
complete health assessments on sites listed on EPA's National Priorities List while EPA conducts
site characterization and remediation. Moreover, EPA site managers work with their ATSDR
counterparts to coordinate public human health messaging. For NIEHS, EPA collaborates and
coordinates academic research related to contaminant toxicities, site characterization and
758

-------
remediation and risk communication. EPA collaborates with HUD on residential risk evaluation
and mitigation, while the Agency's work with USACE spans a wide range of technical,
management and acquisition support functions to implement or oversee responsible party
Superfund project implementation for the remedial and removal programs. EPA's participation in
the Federal Mining Dialogue has established the Agency's role in a multi-agency (e.g., DOE, DOI,
etc.) partnership to address mining sites on federal and mixed ownership lands. Membership in the
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable facilitates EPA's collaboration with multiple
federal entities, such as DOD, NASA, DOT, to advance the use of innovative technologies to clean
up hazardous waste contamination.
Superfund Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Program
EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Program coordinates with other Federal
Agencies (OFAs); state, Tribal, and local governments; and communities to implement its
statutory responsibilities to ensure protective and efficient cleanup and reuse of federally
contaminated land on the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket and the NPL.
Successful coordination requires strong partnerships and enhanced engagement by having
regularly scheduled and ad hoc meetings that targe and resolve critical programmatic issues,
emphasize selection and implementation of protective cleanups, and recognize site reuse
opportunities and successes. EPA has committed to early engagement with our partners that focus
on issues with a problem-solving and action-oriented approach.
The Program also coordinates with national organizations that help to improve engagement such
as the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO), the
Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC), and the Environmental Council of the
States (ECOS). ASTSWMO has a Federal Facilities Research Center Subcommittee that promotes
and enhances state and territory involvement in the cleanup and reuse of contaminated federal
facilities and fosters information exchange by and between states, territories, and OF As. This
includes identifying and researching emerging issues related to state and federal cleanup programs
at federal facility sites, producing and disseminating resource documents and tools, and working
with EPA and OF As on a variety of federal facility issues and forums. Current topics of interest
include addressing contaminants of emerging concern like perchlorate, PFAS and 1,4-dioxane;
ensuring ARARs are identified and implemented; monitoring long-term remedies to ensure
protectiveness; and participating in the implementation and oversight of the Munitions Response
Program. ITRC is a state-led coalition working to reduce barriers to the use of innovative air,
water, waste, and remediation environmental technologies and processes. ITRC produces
documents and training that broaden and deepen technical knowledge and expedite quality
regulatory decision making while protecting human health and the environment. EPA, along with
OF As and industry representatives, works through ITRC in defining continuing research needs
through its teams including on topics of relevance and benefit to federal facility sites, like PFAS,
1,4-dioxane, and the remediation of complex sites.
Through the establishment of a national cleanup dialogue with the Department of Energy (DOE)
and the states in coordination with ECOS, EPA supports special emphasis engagement for nuclear
weapons sites, the largest and costliest portfolio of remaining federal facilities cleanup work. The
759

-------
Dialogue enhances ongoing working relationships in the cleanup of DOE Environmental
Management sites and focuses on topics of mutual relevance and highest priority to ensure timely
advancement of protective cleanups. The Dialogue exemplifies how collaboration can advance
DOE sites and foster an understanding of challenges and successes nationally.
EPA also participates with OF As and states on the Munitions Response Dialogue, partners with
DoD research and development programs on munitions management and environmental
restoration. Current MRD activities include EPA, DoD, Federal Land Management Agencies and
states updating and harmonizing previous munitions risk/hazard assessment methodologies. The
MRD's goal is to achieve consensus on an updated munitions risk/hazard assessment
methodology. EPA also co-chairs the Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force (IDQTF) with
DoD and DOE. The IDQTF works to ensure that environmental data are of known and documented
quality and suitable for the intended use.
EPA actively participates in the Defense Environmental Restoration Program and Formerly Used
Defense Sites (FUDS) forums hosted by the Department of Defense (DoD). DoD's gathering of
State and Federal regulators offers a unique opportunity to partner, share information, and facilitate
more efficient and effective management of DoD's cleanup program. Recent forums focused on
emerging issues, best practices, and lessons learned, as well as new policies and technology
investments to maximize efficiencies and minimize the time it takes to complete cleanup at active,
Base Realignment and Closure installations, and FUDS. Similar forums hosted by DoD service
components provide EPA and states further opportunities for engagement, often focused on topics
tailored to the unique aspects of the response programs of the Army, Navy or Air Force.
EPA also coordinates with OF As on the Federal Mining Dialogue (FMD). The FMD is a
cooperative initiative among federal environmental and land management agencies that provide a
national-level forum for federal agencies to identify and discuss lessons learned and technical
mining impact issues associated with the cleanup and reuse of abandoned and inactive hard rock
mine and mineral processing sites across the country. EPA also engages with OF As in the
complementary Abandoned Uranium Mine Work Group, which focuses on investigation and
cleanup of legacy uranium ore mining and mill tailing sites in the in the western U.S. Multiple
program and enforcement offices participate for EPA in both venues to ensure coordinated
engagement across the Agency.
RCRA Waste Minimization and Recycling: Supporting Sustainable Materials Management
Natural resource extraction and processing make up approximately 50 percent of total global
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Under RCRA, EPA provides data, information, guidelines,
tools, and technical assistance on resource conservation, recycling, and resource recovery. As part
of this work, EPA focuses on increasing the conservation and recovery of municipal solid waste
(e.g., plastics, aluminum, paper, food waste) and industrial waste (construction and demolition
materials). EPA works closely with other federal agencies to advance resource conservation and
recovery through EPA's 2021 National Recycling Strategy, interagency efforts to reduce food loss
and waste, and implementation of the Save our Seas Act 2.0.
760

-------
The Save our Seas Act 2.0, passed by Congress in December 2020, demonstrates bipartisan
congressional interest and provides EPA with authority to further act on domestic recycling and
address plastic waste through new grant programs, studies, and extensive federal coordination.
EPA will coordinate with DOE, several offices within the Department of Commerce (NIST,
NOAA, USTR and ITA); and USAID to implement Save our Seas. EPA also works with federal
agencies to implement the National Recycling Strategy.
EPA works collaboratively with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) to reduce food waste in support of the national goal of reducing food
loss and waste by 50 percent by 2030. EPA also is providing national estimates of food waste
generation and management; convening, educating, and supporting communities seeking to reduce
food waste.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Poly chlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Programs
The RCRA Corrective Action Program coordinates closely with OF As, primarily DOD and DOE,
which have many corrective action sites. A top Agency priority is to help federal facilities meet
the Program's goals of investigating and cleaning up hazardous releases. EPA also coordinates
with other agencies on cleanup and disposal issues posed by PCBs under the authority of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Emergency Preparedness and Response
EPA plays a major role in reducing the risks that accidental and intentional releases of harmful
substances and oil discharges pose to human health and the environment. EPA's leadership in
federal preparedness begins with co-chairing the National Response Team (NRT) and the 13
Regional Response Teams (RRTs) with the USCG. These teams, which have member participation
from 15 total federal agencies (EPA, USCG, United States Department of State, United States
Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management
Agency, United States Department of Energy, United States Department of Agriculture, United
States Department of Health & Human Services (including CDC, NIOSH, and ATSDR), United
States Department of Interior, United States Department of Commerce, United States Department
of Transportation, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, United States General Services
Administration, United States Department of Justice, United States Department of Labor
(including OSHA), provide guidance and deliver federal assistance to state, local, and tribal
governments to plan for and respond to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other major
environmental incidents. This requires coordination with many federal, state, and local agencies.
The Agency participates with other federal agencies to develop national planning and
implementation policies at the operational level.
EPA supports the Weapons of Mass Destruction Strategic Group (WMDSG) crisis-action team
intended to coordinate the United States Government's efforts to successfully resolve a WMD
threat and support interagency senior leader decision making. The WMDSG is comprised of over
50 SMEs representing over 15 different departments and agencies. The WMDSG is on call
24/7/365 to respond to the FBI's Strategic Information and Operations Center (SIOC) within 2
761

-------
hours. The WMDSG - led by the FBI - provides enhanced coordination by focusing on
information sharing and operation synchronization. The WMDSG helps maintain situational
awareness by working directly with FBI Counterterrorism Division (CTD) regarding investigative
activities, and the National Assets Command Post (NACP) regarding crisis operations.
The National Response Framework (NRF), under the direction of the DHS, provides for the
delivery of federal assistance to states to help them deal with the consequences of terrorist events,
acts of malfeasance, as well as natural and other significant disasters. EPA maintains the lead
responsibility for the NRF's Emergency Support Function #10 (covering inland hazardous
materials and petroleum releases) and participates in the Federal Emergency Support Function
Leaders Group which addresses NRF planning and implementation at the operational level.
The National Biodefense Strategy (NBS) provides a single coordinated effort to orchestrate the
full range of activity that is carried out across the United States Government to protect the
American people from biological threats. With National Security Presidential Memorandum
(NSPM)-14, this strategy explains how the United States Government will manage its activities
more effectively to assess, prevent, detect, prepare for, respond to, and recover from biological
threats, coordinating its biodefense efforts with those of international partners, industry, academia,
non-governmental entities, and the private sector The Biodefense Steering Committee, chaired by
the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and comprising the Secretary of State, the Secretary
of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs,
the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, will be responsible for overseeing and coordinating the execution of the strategy and its
implementation plan, and ensuring federal coordination with domestic and international
government and non-governmental partners.
Oil Spills
Under the Oil Spill Program, EPA provides assistance to agencies such as FWS and the USCG
and works in coordination to address oil discharges nationwide. EPA also assists agencies with
judicial referrals when enforcement of violations becomes necessary. In addition, EPA and the
USCG work in coordination to address oil spills nationwide. Under the authorities provided by the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) or Clean Water Act (CWA), EPA develops oil
discharge response, prevention and preparedness regulations. EPA also provides compliance
monitoring activities to enforce these regulations and coordinates with USCG, DOT, and B SEE in
their implementation.
Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian Country
EPA, DOI, DHHS, USDA, and HUD work through several MOUs as partners to improve
infrastructure on tribal lands. All five federal partners have committed to continue federal
coordination in delivering services to tribal communities. The Infrastructure Task Force has built
on prior partner successes, including improved access to funding and reduced administrative
burden for tribal communities through the review and streamlining of agency policies, regulations,
and directives as well as improved coordination of technical assistance to water service providers
and solid waste managers through regular coordination meetings and web-based tools.
762

-------
Homeland Security
EPA's Homeland Security, Preparedness and Response Program continues to develop and
maintain agency assets and capabilities to respond to and support nationally significant incidents
with emphasis on those involving chemical warfare agents. The Program implements a broad range
of activities for a variety of internal and multi-agency efforts consistent with the NRF and the
Homeland Security Presidential Directives that EPA leads or supports. This includes being the
lead analytical agency for environmental sampling during a CWA incident. EPA also coordinates
its preparedness activities with DHS, FEMA, FBI, and other federal, state and local agencies.
Research to Support Homeland Security
EPA collaborates with numerous agencies on Homeland Security research in order to leverage
funding across multiple programs and produce synergistic results. EPA's Homeland Security
Research Program works with DHS to back decisions made in its role as a lead agency responsible
for cleanup during a Stafford Act declaration under ESF-10 and as the lead agency for water
infrastructure. EPA also works with the DOD and its sub-organizations in its research work related
to biological and chemical warfare agents. Further, EPA participates in a tri-agency research
partnership (Technical Coordination Working Group [TCWG]) with the DOD and DHS that
focuses on chemical and biological defense needs and gaps. TCWG activities include: information
sharing; joint science and technology research projects; and complementing policies. EPA also
collaborates with the CDC in conducting biological agent research.
EPA works with these aforementioned entities and others to address areas of mutual interest and
concern related to both homeland security cleanup and water infrastructure protection issues. The
Program conducts joint research with USD A and DOI focusing on addressing homeland security
threats at the intersection of the environment/public health and agriculture/natural resources. EPA
also works with DOE to access and conduct research at the DOE's National Laboratories
specialized research facilities, such as to establish the Water Security Test Bed and develop
analytical capabilities for biological and chemical agents in environmental matrices.
Research to Support Land and Emergency Management Programs
EPA has complementary and joint programs with the USFS, USGS, USD A, US ACE, NOAA,
BLM, and many others to minimize duplication, maximize scope, and maintain a real-time
information flow for land and emergency management issues. EPA coordinates its research to
support a range of environmental priorities at other federal agencies, including work with DOD in
its Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program and the Environmental Security
Technology Certification Program, and works with DOE and its Office of Health and
Environmental Research. EPA also conducts collaborative laboratory research with DOD, DOI,
and USGS to improve characterization and risk management options for dealing with subsurface
contamination. EPA also works through the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) in
defining continuing research needs through its teams on topics including PFAS, radionuclides, and
brownfields.
763

-------
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Programs
General Coordination for Chemical Safety
EPA established an Interagency Policy Group comprised of other Federal agencies with interest
and expertise in chemical issues to hold periodic meetings to obtain input on significant actions
such as the TSCA Risk Evaluations rules and potential existing chemical candidates for
Prioritization under TSCA. The agencies on the Interagency Policy Group include: CPSC, DOD,
OMB, NASA, DOL, SBA, NIH, FDA and CDC. EPA has utilized this group to review TSCA
materials including, but not limited to, risk evaluations documents related to scoping of existing
chemicals for risk evaluation and associated draft risk evaluations.
EPA also engages in biannual meetings with the OMNE1 Committee, which includes the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Mining Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA), NIOSH, and the NIEHS. The OMNE Committee exists to provide a
venue for federal agencies to share information and coordinate activities regarding proposed rules,
risk assessments, and risk management strategies for controlling exposure to chemicals.
Federal Lead Action Plan
Established by Executive Order 13045, the President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks to Children comprises 17 federal departments and offices and is co-chaired by
the Secretary of DHHS and the EPA Administrator. In December 2018, through cross-
governmental collaboration, the Task Force unveiled the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood
Lead Exposures and Associated Health Impacts (Federal Lead Action Plan). The Federal Lead
Action Plan is a blueprint for reducing lead exposure and associated harms by working with a
range of stakeholders, including states, tribes and local communities, along with businesses,
property owners and parents. In 2019, EPA released the Implementation Status Report and the
Progress Report on EPA-specific goals, objectives and actions under the Federal Lead Action
Plan. In FY 2021 and FY 2022, the Agency will continue to lead those goals and actions,
coordinate with federal, state, tribal and community partners to amplify the impacts, and report on
activities and implementation, as appropriate.
Participation in International Agreements addressing Chemicals and Pesticide Management
To participate more effectively in international agreements addressing chemicals and pesticide
managment (e.g., the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, the Minamata
Convention, the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management, etc.), EPA
coordinates with other federal agencies, including USTR, DOS, DOC, USD A, DOE, and HHS, on
a regular basis to develop the policy views and positions of the United States. EPA also coordinates
with other parts of the U.S. Government, including ATSDR, NIH, and CPSC, on more technical
international matters related to the safety and management of chemicals and pesticides. At the
regional and global levels, EPA engages in bilateral cooperation and information exchange with a
wide range of countries and regional organizations, such as the European Union (EU), Canada,
China, Australia, Japan, Brazil, and many others.
1 The OMNE Committee is named for the first letter in each participating agency's name.
764

-------
In addition to participating in the U.S. Government trade development process, EPA also
specifically engages in trilateral cooperation with Canada and Mexico through the U.S.-Mexico-
Canada (USMCA) Free Trade Agreement, particularly with respect to the provisions related to
agriculture, technical barriers to trade, and environment, among others. Such engagement is
designed to promote further trade and regional cooperation among the three governments through
targeted efforts and technical working groups. EPA also works closely with a number of countries
in the context of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to further
coordination amongst the OECD Member countries and observer governments. For example,
OCSPP serves as the National Coordinator for the United States in support of the OECD Test
Guidelines Program's mutual acceptance of data work, which aims to reduce the need to repeat
health effects studies due to incompatible test protocols. Additionally, EPA is engaged in the
OECD Working Group on Pesticides (WGP), which shares pesticide registration work and develop
tools to monitor and minimize pesticide risk to human health and the environment, and with the
Chemicals and Biotechnology Committee, which oversees eleven working groups and other subsidiary
bodies in the chemicals and pesticide arenas.
Certification and Training, Worker Protection, IPM, and Environmental Stewardship
EPA will continue to coordinate with USD A, DOD, DOI, DOE, tribes, territories, and states to
implement Certification Plans for pesticide applicators who use the riskiest pesticides. EPA
provides technical guidance and assistance to the states and tribes in the implementation of all
pesticide program activities, such as protecting workers, promoting Integrated Pest Management
and environmental stewardship. EPA also provides support through grants, cooperative
agreements, or interagency agreements with states, tribes and other partners, including universities,
non-profit organizations, other federal agencies, pesticide users, environmental groups, and other
entities, as necessary, to assist in strengthening and implementing EPA's pesticide activities, such
as worker protection, pollinator protection and certifying pesticide applicators.
Assessing Potential Pesticide Risks with Supplemental Data
EPA relies on data from DHHS and USD A to supplement data from the pesticide industry in order
to assist the Agency in assessing the potential risks of pesticides in the diets of adults and children.
Specifically, EPA uses National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES) food consumption
survey data developed by the DHHS, as well as pesticide residue data in food commodities
generated by the USDA in its Pesticide Data Program (PDP) as inputs for dietary risk assessment.
Endangered Species & Pollinator Protection
EPA will continue collaborating with the USDA, FWS, and NMFS on protecting endangered and
threatened species and improving methods for assessing potential risks and effects of pesticides to
them. EPA, in cooperation with USDA, other federal agencies, state agencies, tribes, territories,
and other entities, will continue to address pesticide risks to bees and other pollinators which are
critical to our environment and the production of food crops.
765

-------
Homeland Security - Protecting Food & Agriculture Sectors
EPA collaborates with the agencies such as DOD, DHS, USD A, FDA, FEMA, and other federal,
tribal and state organizations on a variety of homeland security issues as part of the Government
Coordinating Council (GCC) For Food and Agriculture. The issues focus on protecting the public
and food and agriculture sector from various threats (e.g., biological agents, diseases, or natural
disasters) which are vital to critical functions of the government and private sector. EPA
collaborates with these organizations on many issues such as research pertaining to effective
disinfectants for high threat microorganisms, planning for response to various potential incidents,
training and development of policies and guidelines. In addition to GCC efforts, EPA continues to
partner with the OSHA, NIOSH, and CPSC on risk assessment and risk mitigation activities.
Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC)
One of the Agency's methods for receiving input on pesticide issues has been the Pesticide
Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC), a Federal Advisory Committee, that brings together a
broad cross-section of knowledgeable stakeholders from organizations that represent divergent
views in order to discuss pesticide regulatory, policy, and implementation issues. The PPDC
includes members from federal and state governments, industry/trade associations, pesticide user
and commodity groups, consumer and environmental/public interest groups, and others. The
PPDC provides a structured environment for meaningful information exchanges and discussions,
and keeping the public involved in decisions that affect them. Dialogue with outside groups is
essential for the Agency to remain responsive to the needs of its many partners.
General Research to Support Chemical Safety
EPA participates in a multi-agency effort under the Tox21 collaboration. Tox21 pools chemical
research, data and screening tools from multiple federal agencies including EPA, and the NIH and
FDA. EPA has contributed a chemical library, currently exceeding 4,000 chemicals, to the Tox21
testing program.2'3 Nearly all of this library includes data from EPA's Toxicity Forecaster
(.ToxCast™), an effort that utilizes existing resources to develop faster, more thorough predictions
of how chemicals may affect human and environmental health. The full Tox21 library comprises
approximately equal sized contributions from EPA, the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and
the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), and currently exceeds 9,000
unique substances.
Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are a class of chemicals of emerging concern (CECs)
in the environment. For most PFAS chemicals, there are little or no published toxicity data
available.4 In collaboration with the NTP, EPA is addressing this data gap by conducting high-
throughput toxicological screening assays on hundreds of PFAS chemicals. The results will be
used to identify categories of PFAS chemicals having similar structural and toxicological
properties that may inform the development and strength of predictive toxicological models.
2	Collins. F.S.. Gray. G.M.. andBucher. J.R. ("20081. Transforming environmental health protection. Science. 319. 906-907. doi:
10.1126/science.l 154619.
3	Tice. R.R.. Austin. C.P.. Kavlock. R.J.. and Bucher. J.R. (20131. Improving the human hazard characterization of chemicals: a
Tox21 updat e. Environmental Health Perspectives. 121.156-765. doi: 10.1289/ehp. 1205784.
4	For more information, please see: https://www.epa.gov/pfas/epa-pfas-research.
766

-------
Resources requested in FY 2022 will build upon the research foundation formed from completed
work outlined in the PFAS Action Plan.
Research to Support the Amended Toxic Substances Control Act
EPA collaborates globally with other federal agencies on research to accelerate the pace of
chemical risk assessment and to provide greater regulatory certainty for the public. EPA is working
with Health Canada and the European Joint Research Center on the development and testing of
new non-animal approach methodologies to evaluate chemicals quickly and cost-effectively for
safety. These new approach methods are a critical part of implementing the TSCA Strategic Plan
to reduce, refine, and replace the use of vertebrates in toxicity testing and evaluation. EPA also
commenced work with Health Canada and ECHA to promote sharing of non-confidential chemical
safety information with the intent of advancing chemical evaluations across regulatory
jurisdictions. This collaborative approach will help EPA and other federal agencies screen,
prioritize and evaluate chemicals, and promote implementation of alternative methods to replace
vertebrate animal testing under TSCA. Finally, EPA is engaged in multiple OECD chemical safety
groups that share information, expertise, and research results related to chemical safety.
Ultimately, these international efforts will work towards creating transparent data requirements for
industry and reducing the regulatory uncertainty of multiple regulatory environments globally.
Research to Support Agencywide Risk Assessment Activities
EPA consults and collaborates routinely with other federal agencies about the science of individual
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments, as well as efforts to prioritize and
coordinate chemical evaluations. IRIS maintains an interagency working group that consists of
various federal agencies (e.g., DOD, NASA, SB A, DOT, DOE, DOI, etc.), and the White House.
EPA also coordinates, respectively, with: ATSDR, through an MOU on the development of
toxicological reviews and toxicology profiles; NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program, on
assessment methodology, software, and assay development platforms; FDA on advisories and
reports; and DOD on assessment development. In addition, EPA contracts with the National
Academy of Sciences' National Research Council (NRC) on very difficult and complex human
health risk assessments through consultation or review. EPA also participates in the Interagency
Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) to work towards
increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of U.S. federal agency test method review, eliminating
unnecessary duplication of effort, sharing experience among U.S. federal regulatory agencies, and
reducing, refining, and replacing the use of animals in testing.
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Programs
General Enforcement Coordination
The Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program coordinates closely with:
•	DOJ on all civil and criminal environmental enforcement matters. In addition, the Program has
coordinated with other agencies on specific environmental issues as described herein;
•	The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, OSHA, and ATSDR in preventing and
responding to accidental releases and endangerment situations;
767

-------
•	DOI's Bureau of Indian Affairs, and DHHS's IHS on issues relative to compliance with
environmental laws in Indian country;
•	The DOC and SBA on the implementation of SBREFA. In addition, it has collaborated with
the SBA to maintain current environmental compliance information at Business.gov, a website
initiated as an e-government initiative in 2004, to help small businesses comply with
government regulations. The IRS on cases that require defendants to pay civil penalties,
thereby assisting the IRS in assuring compliance with tax laws;
•	USACE on wetlands issues;
•	DOT's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration on pipeline spills;
•	USDA on the regulation of animal feeding operations and on food safety issues arising from
the misuse of pesticides and shares joint jurisdiction with the Federal Trade Commission on
pesticide labeling and advertising; and,
•	United States Customs and Border Protection in order to stop the importation of internal
combustion vehicles and engines that do not meet Clean Air Act requirements.
International Trade
EPA works with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on implementing the secure
International Trade Data System (ITDS) across all federal agencies and on pesticide imports and
on hazardous waste and Cathode Ray Tube exports, as well as on a variety of other import/export
issues under the various statutes (e.g., imports of vehicles and engines).
Coordination on Issues Involving Shared Jurisdiction
EPA and FDA share jurisdiction over general-purpose disinfectants used on non-critical surfaces
and some dental and medical equipment surfaces. EPA and FDA also collaborate and share
information on Good Laboratory Program inspections to avoid duplication of inspections and
maximize efficient use of limited resources. The Agency has entered into an agreement with the
HUD concerning enforcement of the TSCA lead-based paint notification requirements. The
Agency has coordinated with the USCG under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, and on
discharges of pollutant from ships and oil spills under the CWA. EPA also works with the DOI on
CWA permit enforcement on the Outer Continental Shelf, as well as both the Interior and
Transportation Departments on enforcement of CWA requirements for offshore facilities.
Criminal Enforcement
EPA's Criminal Enforcement Program coordinates with the FBI, CBP, DOL, U.S. Treasury,
USCG, DOI and DO J and with international, state, tribal, and local law enforcement organizations
in the investigation and prosecution of environmental crimes. EPA also works with DOJ to
establish task forces that bring together federal, state, tribal, and local law enforcement
organizations to address environmental crimes. EPA has an Interagency Agreement with DOJ's
Environment and Natural Resources Division to develop the first federal Environmental Crime
Victim Assistance Program. This allows both agencies to meet their statutory obligations under
the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act (VRRA), to
768

-------
make sure that environmental crime victims are notified of and accorded their rights under the
CVRA and VRRA. In addition, the Program has an Interagency Agreement with the DHS to
provide specialized criminal environmental training to federal, state, local, and tribal law
enforcement personnel at the Federal Law Enforcement Center (FLETC) in Glynco, Georgia.
Monitoring the Environmental Compliance of Federal Agencies
Most environmental statutes require departments, agencies and instrumentalities of the U.S.
government to comply with environmental requirements just like any other regulated entity. EPA
and states inspect federal facilities and take enforcement actions, as appropriate. In addition,
Executive Order 12088 on Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards directs EPA to
monitor compliance by federal agencies with all environmental laws and provide technical
assistance. The Federal Facility Enforcement Program coordinates with other federal, state, tribal,
and local agencies to ensure compliance by federal agencies with all environmental laws. EPA
works through the Federal Facilities Environmental Stewardship and Compliance Assistance
Center (FedCenter) fwww.fedcenter.gov), which is governed by a board of more than a dozen
contributing federal agencies. EPA also partners with other federal agencies to identify ways to
expedite cleanup of Superfund sites and prevent and address regulatory compliance issues.
FedCenter works with federal agencies to plan Federal Environmental Symposiums to encourage
collaboration, information sharing, stewardship, and improved environmental compliance across
the federal government. EPA is working with other Agencies through FedCenter to address
Administration priorities including PFAS and environmental justice.
Superfund Enforcement
EPA oversees federal agency CERCLA cleanups for federal facilities listed on the National
Priorities List (NPL) through a Federal Facility Agreement. Where appropriate, EPA takes action
to enforce and coordinates with OF As in their use of CERCLA enforcement authority. This
includes the coordinated use of such authority at individual hazardous waste sites that are located
on both non-federal land (EPA jurisdiction) and federal lands (other agency jurisdiction). As
required by Executive Order 13016, EPA also reviews and concurs on the use of CERCLA Section
106 authority by other departments and agencies. In addition, EPA coordinates closely with
Federal Land Management Agencies (FLMAs), such as BLM and USFS, at mixed ownership sites
(i.e., those sites located partially on privately-owned land and partially on federally owned land)
pursuant to Executive Order 12580. EPA frequently enters into Memoranda of Understanding
(MOUs) with FLMAs designed to provide a framework for agencies to coordinate response
actions. Most recently, as part of the Superfund Task Force Recommendations, EPA has been
working on an MOU with FLMAs to improve the efficient and effective use of federal resources
to cleanup at mixed ownership mining sites. EPA also meets with DOI and USDA as part of the
Federal Mining Dialogue, to discuss developments arising out of the CERCLA work at such sites.
EPA also coordinates with DOI, USDA, DOC, DOE, and DOD to ensure that appropriate and
timely notices, required under CERCLA, are sent to the Natural Resource Trustees notifying them
of potential damages to natural resources. EPA also coordinates with Natural Resource Trustees
on natural resource damage assessments, investigations, and planning of response activities under
Section 104 of CERCLA. When an enforcement action is initiated at a site where hazardous
769

-------
substances are found to have caused damages to natural resources, EPA coordinates with the
Trustees by including them in negotiations with potentially responsible parties concerning the
releases that have caused those damages.
Under Executive Order 12580, EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement Program assists
federal agencies in complying with CERCLA, and ensures that: (1) all federal facility sites on the
NPL have interagency agreements, also known as Federal Facility Agreements (FFAs) with
enforceable cleanup schedules; (2) FFAs are monitored for compliance; (3) federal sites are
transferred to new owners in an environmentally responsible manner; and (4) compliance
assistance is available to the extent possible. This program also ensures that federal agencies
comply with Superfund cleanup obligations "in the same manner and to the same extent" as private
entities. To enable the cleanup and reuse of such sites, the Federal Facilities Enforcement Program
also has coordinated creative solutions that help restore facilities, so they can once again serve an
important role in the economy and welfare of local communities, and the country.
International and Tribal Affairs Programs
Supporting Global Policy to Reduce Pollution and Harmful Chemicals
EPA has a strong network of partners working to achieve reductions in global mercury use and
emissions, particularly when adverse U.S. impacts would be likely. EPA works closely with the
DOS in leading the technical and policy engagement for the U.S. in the Minamata Convention on
Mercury and the multi-stakeholder Global Mercury Partnership. In addition to the DOS, EPA
collaborates with several federal agencies including USGS and US AID to advance robust
implementation of the Minamata Convention by other countries. EPA also continues to share
information through the Arctic Council on reducing releases of mercury which disproportionally
impact indigenous arctic communities.
Similarly, EPA is engaged in a multi-pronged effort to address the growing global problem of
marine litter. Here, EPA works with the DOS, NOAA, Peace Corps, and USAID to advance policy
and technical solutions for marine litter in global fora. EPA also is working with USDA, OMB
and FDA on the on reducing food waste which includes international cooperation on measuring
food waste reductions and pilot activities that can create market opportunities for U.S. technologies
and innovation.
Supporting Environmental Priorities in Global Trade Policy and Implementation of
Environmental Cooperation Agreements
Since the 1972 Trade Act mandated the U.S. Trade Representative to engage in interagency
consultations, EPA has played a key role in trade policy development. Specifically, EPA is a
member of the Trade Policy Staff Committee, the Trade Policy Review Group and relevant
subcommittees - interagency mechanisms that provide advice, guidance, and clearance to the
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative in the development of U.S. international trade and
investment policy.
770

-------
EPA continue its participation in the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation
(CEC), which provides regional and international leadership to advance environmental protection,
human health, and sustainable economic growth in North America. EPA also will continue work
on implementation of the Environment Chapter of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement
(USMCA) and other free trade agreements. EPA also continues active participation in the United
States Trade Representative (USTR) led Interagency Environment Committee for Monitoring and
Environment (IECME) established to promote Mexican and Canadian compliance with their
environmental obligations. In addition, EPA continues to work with partners (including the
Treasury Department, State Department, U.S. Agency for International Development, and.the U.S.
International Development Finance Corporation), to improve environmental governance of U.S.
funded international development projects.
Addressing Transboundary Pollution
EPA collaborates with countries around the world to address foreign sources of pollution in
coordination with DOS, USAID, DOJ, Treasury, and others. EPA works closely with DHHS to
advance recognition of environmental risk factors of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and how
to mitigate the risks, including from lead and mercury. In addition, EPA continues to strengthen
its activities in the Arctic by working with Alaska, tribes, federal agencies, and the private sector
to build international support for U.S. environmental policy objectives through the Arctic Council.
These objectives cover a range of topics, including reducing emissions and exposure to mercury.
EPA also plays a leadership role with other agencies including NOAA, DOS, and USAID in
crafting sound programs to address marine litter globally, ensuring that sound waste management
and recycling strategies are advanced in key source countries.
Working in Indian Country
EPA works under a five-federal agency MOU to better coordinate the federal government's efforts
in providing access to safe drinking water and basic wastewater facilities for tribal communities.
EPA, DOI, DHHS, USD A, and HUD work as the Federal Tribal Infrastructure Task Force (TITF)
to use their combined authorities to maintain a framework to enhance interagency efficiency and
coordination, and to cultivate greater cooperation in carrying out their tribal infrastructure
responsibilities. Since 2007, the TITF has: maintained procedures necessary for a common
understanding of the programs pertaining to funding infrastructure construction, solid waste
management efforts, and technical assistance to tribes; worked together to improve the capacity of
tribal communities to operate and maintain sustainable infrastructure; enhanced the efficient
leveraging of funds; worked directly with tribes to promote an understanding of federal programs;
identified ways to improve construction, operation, and maintenance of sustainable infrastructure;
and worked to allow and facilitate the exchange of data and information amongst partners.5
5 For additional information, please visit: https://www.epa.gov/tribal/federal-infrastructure-task-force-imDrove-access-safe-
drinking-water-and-basic-sanitation.
771

-------
Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance Programs
Working with Federal Partners on Improving Management and Accountability throughout the
Federal Government
EPA participates and makes active contributions to standing interagency management committees,
including:
•	the Chief Financial Officers Council focuses on improving resources management and
accountability throughout the federal government;
•	the Performance Improvement Council coordinates and develops strategic plans,
performance plans, and performance reports as required by law;
•	OMB-led E-Government initiatives such as the Financial Management and Budget
Formulation and Execution Lines of Business;
•	the Bureau of Census-maintained the Federal Assistance Awards Data System; and
•	the President's Management Council oversees developing and implementing Cross-
Agency Priority (CAP) goals.
Provide Government-to-Government Employee Relocation Services
EPA provides government-to-government employee relocation services via interagency
agreements through EPA's Federal Employee Relocation Center (FERC) as a Working Capital
Fund (WCF) activity. EPA-FERC provides "one-stop shop" domestic and international relocation
services to other federal agencies to increase operational efficiency and save the government
money. EPA-FERC currently provides relocation services internally to all EPA offices, and
externally to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), DOL, Office of Personnel
Management (OPM), United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), DHHS, and the
USDA. EPA also coordinates appropriately with Congress and other federal agencies, such as the
U.S. Treasury, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and GSA.
Mission Support Programs
Working with Federal Partners on Improving Management and Accountability throughout the
Federal Government
EPA provides leadership and expertise to government-wide activities in various areas of human
resources, grants management, contracts management, suspension and debarment, and homeland
security. These activities include specific collaboration efforts through:
•	The Chief Human Capital Officers Council, a group of senior leaders that discuss human
capital initiatives across the federal government.
772

-------
•	The Legislative and Policy Committee, a committee comprised of other federal agency
representatives who assist OPM in developing plans and policies for training and
development.
•	The Chief Acquisition Officers Council, the principal interagency forum for monitoring
and improving the federal acquisition system. The Council also is focused on promoting
the President's specific initiatives and policies in all aspects of the acquisition system.
•	The Award Committee for E-Government (E-Gov) provides strategic vision for the
portfolio of systems/federal wide supporting both federal acquisition and financial
assistance. Support also is provided to the associated functional community groups,
including the Procurement Committee for E-Gov, the Financial Assistance Committee for
E-Gov, and the Intergovernmental Transaction Working Group.
The Interagency Suspension and Debarment Committee (ISDC), a representative committee of
federal agency leaders in suspension and debarment. The Committee facilitates lead agency
coordination, serves as a forum to discuss current suspension and debarment related issues, and
assists in developing unified federal policy. Besides participating in the ISDC, EPA: 1) provides
instructors for the National Suspension and Debarment Training Program offered through the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, and 2) supports the development of coursework and
training on the suspension and debarment process for the Inspector General Academy and the
Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency.
The Financial Management Line of Business (FMLoB) has been expanded to also encompass the
Grants Management Line of Business. The combined FMLoB, with U. S. Treasury as the managing
partner, will more closely align the financial assistance and financial management communities
around effective and efficient management of funds. EPA also participates in the Grants.gov
Users' Group, as well as the Federal Demonstration Partnership which is designed to reduce the
administrative burdens associated with research grants.
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities initiative, a collaborative effort with HUD and DOT,
improves the alignment and delivery of grant resources to communities designated under certain
environmental programs. It also helps identify cases in the Program that may warrant consideration
of suspension and debarment.
The Interagency Committee on Federal Advisory Committee Management (Committee
Management Officer Council) provides leadership and coordination on federal advisory committee
issues and promotes effective and efficient committee operations government-wide. In addition to
serving on the Council, EPA works with the GSA Committee Management Secretariat to establish
and renew advisory committees, conduct annual reviews of advisory committee activities and
accomplishments, maintain committee information in a publicly accessible online database, and
develop committee management regulations, guidance, and training. Further, EPA participates on
773

-------
the GSA Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Attorney Council Interagency Workgroup to
keep abreast of developments in the statutory language, case law, interpretation and
implementation of the FACA.
The Interagency Security Committee (ISC) is the leading organization for nonmilitary federal
departments and agencies in establishing policies for the security and protection of federal
facilities, developing security standards, and ensuring compliance with those standards. EPA
participates in the ISC as a primary member and in sub-committees and workgroups to facilitate
EPA's compliance with ISC standards for facilities nationwide.
The OPM Background Investigations Stakeholder Group (BISG) is a collaborative organization
that is derived from the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The BISG is
comprised of senior security officials across the federal government who are responsible for the
submission, adjudication and/or oversight of personnel security programs. EPA works with this
group to discuss topics regarding background investigations, focusing on standardizing and
improving the Agency's personnel security program.
EPA manages the Senior Environmental Employment (SEE) Program's interagency agreements
with other federal agencies. The interagency agreements are with the CEQ, the FHWA, NOAA,
and the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council. SEE participants provide administrative,
technical, and professional support to these agencies for projects relating to pollution prevention,
abatement, and control.
EPA's Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ) partners with the USPTO, NOAA, the
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission to serve as Presiding Officers for proceedings to adjudicate
complaints brought before the partner organizations. This collaboration allows partner
organizations the ability to provide constitutionally guaranteed legal due process and review
without staffing and supporting their own office of Administrative Law Judges, while EPA's
judges expand their experience and knowledge in the area of administrative law. The services
OALJ provides to other agencies are reimbursed by the borrowing organization.
Work with the Department of Interior's Interior Business Center
In FY 2022, EPA will continue working with DOI's Interior Business Center (IBC), an OPM- and
OMB-approved Human Resources Line of Business shared service center. IBC offers HR
transactional processing, compensation management and payroll processing, benefits
administration, time and attendance, HR reporting, talent acquisition systems, and talent
management systems. EPA also continues its charter membership on the OPM HR Line of
Business Multi Agency Executive Strategy Committee (MAESC), providing advice and
recommendations to the Director of OPM as well as additional government-wide executive
leadership, for the implementation of the HR Line of Business vision, goals, and objectives.
774

-------
Partnering with GSA on the US Access Program
EPA is partnering with GSA on the USAccess Program for Personal Identity Verification cards
and identity credential solutions, which provides an efficient, economical and secure infrastructure
to support its credentialing needs, and migrations to the Enterprise Physical Access Control
System, allowing the Agency to control access in EPA space, including restricted and secure space.
Environmental Information Programs
To support EPA's overall mission, the Agency collaborates with federal, state, and tribal agencies
on a variety of initiatives focused on making government more efficient and transparent in
protecting human health and the environment. EPA's Environmental Information programs are
primarily involved in the information technology (IT), information management (IM), and
information security aspects of the projects on which it collaborates.
The Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council
The CIO Council is the principal interagency forum for improving practices in the design,
modernization, use, sharing, and performance of federal information resources. The Council
develops recommendations for IT/IM policies, procedures, and standards; identifies opportunities
to share information resources; and assesses and addresses the needs of the federal IT workforce.
eRulemaking
The eRulemaking Program is a Federal E-Government shared Line of Business (LoB) that
manages the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) and Regulations.gov. The Program
provides the public with one-stop access to electronic dockets and the ability to electronically
comment on proposed rulemakings and de-regulatory actions for multiple federal agencies.
At the beginning of FY 2020, the Program Managing Organization transitioned from EPA to the
GSA. EPA will continue working with GSA as a Partner Agency to improve FDMS and provide
the public with access to electronic dockets and the ability to electronically comment on proposed
rulemaking and de-regulatory actions.
The National Environmental Information Exchange Network (EN)
EPA's EN Program and CBP are coordinating on using the Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE) system. This coordination will lead to automated processing of over 8 million EPA-related
electronic filings needed to clear legitimate imports and exports. With the move from paper filings
to electronic filings combined with automated processing through ACE, filing time can be reduced
from weeks/days to minutes/days. This significant processing improvement directly impacts the
movement of goods into commerce and the economy while helping to ensure compliance with
environmental and CBP laws and regulations. It also helps the U.S. Government keep pace with
the speed of business.
775

-------
Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System (ACE/ITDS)
ITDS is the electronic information exchange capability, or "single window," through which
businesses will transmit data required by participating agencies for the import or export of cargo.
ACE is the system built by CBP to ensure that its customs officers and other federal agencies have
the information they need to decide how to handle goods and merchandise being shipped into or
out of the United States. It also will be the way those agencies provide CBP with information about
potential imports/exports. ITDS eliminates the need, burden, and cost of paper reporting. It also
allows importers and exporters to report the same information to multiple federal agencies with a
single submission and facilitates movement of cargo by automating processing of the import and
exports. ITDS provides the capability for industry to consolidate reporting for commodities
regulated by multiple agencies. For these consolidated reports, the industry filers will receive the
appropriate status response when their filings meet each agency's reporting requirements. Once
all agency reporting requirements have been met, filers can receive a coordinated single U.S.
government response to proceed into the commerce of the United States.
EPA has the responsibility and legal authority to make sure pesticides, toxic chemicals, vehicles
and engines, ODS, and other commodities entering and hazardous waste exiting the country meet
its human health and environmental standards. EPA's ongoing collaboration with CBP on the
ACE/ITDS effort will improve the efficiency of processing these shipments through information
exchange between EPA and CBP and automated processing of electronic filings. As resources
permit, EPA will continue to work with CBP to automate the manual paper review process for
admissibility so that importers and brokers (referred to collectively as Trade) can know before
these commodities are loaded onto an airplane, truck, train, or ship if their shipment meets EPA's
reporting requirements. Because of this automated review, Trade can greatly lower its cost of doing
business and customs officers at our nation's ports will have the information on whether shipments
comply with our environmental regulations. EPA will continue to collaborate with CBP to support
regulatory changes and integrate with new ACE capabilities for streamlining the import and export
processes for America's businesses.
Geospatial Information
EPA works with 31 federal agencies through the activities of the Federal Geographic Data
Committee (FGDC) and the OMB Geospatial Line of Business (Geo LoB). EPA also participates
in the FGDC Steering Committee. A key component of EPA's work with FGDC is developing and
implementing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) and the National GeoPlatform. The
key objective of the NSDI is to make a comprehensive array of national spatial data - data that
portrays features associated with a location or tagged with geographic information and can be
attached to and portrayed on maps - easily accessible to both governmental and public
stakeholders. Use of this data, in tandem with analytical applications, supports several key EPA
and government-wide business areas. These include ensuring that human health and environmental
conditions are represented in the appropriate contexts for targeting and decision making; enabling
the assessment, protection, and remediation of environmental conditions; and aiding emergency
first responders and other homeland security activities. EPA supports geospatial initiatives through
efforts such as EPA's GeoPlatform, EPA's Environmental Dataset Gateway, the Exchange
Network, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Assist, EJScreen, the EPA Metadata Editor,
776

-------
Facilities Registry System (FRS) Web Services, and My Environment. EPA also works closely
with its state, tribal, and international partners in a collaboration that enables consistent
implementation of data acquisition and development, standards, and technologies supporting the
efficient and cost-effective sharing and use of geographically based data and services.
The Administrator's Office
Regulatory Management and Economic Analyses
EPA's Policy Office (OP) interacts with federal agencies during its rulemaking activities. Per
governing statutes and agency priorities, OP submits "significant" regulatory actions to OMB for
interagency review prior to signature and publication in the Federal Register. In addition, OP
coordinates EPA's review of other agency's regulatory actions submitted to OMB for review.
Under the Congressional Review Act, rules are submitted to each chamber of Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. For regulations that may have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, OP collaborates extensively with SBA and OMB.
OP also collaborates with other federal regulatory and natural resource agencies to collect data
used in economic cost-benefit analyses of environmental regulations and policies and to foster
improved interdisciplinary research and reporting. Activities include representing EPA on
interagency workgroups or committees tasked with measuring the economic costs and benefits of
federal policies and programs. Occasionally, OP also provides technical reviews of other agencies
research and analyses.
Children's Health
The Administrator of EPA and the Secretary of DHHS co-chair the President's Task Force on
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. The Task Force comprises 17 federal
departments, agencies and White House offices. A senior staff steering committee, co-chaired by
the Director of EPA's Office of Children's Health Protection (OCHP), coordinates interagency
cooperation on Task Force priority areas. As part of this effort, OCHP coordinates with other
agencies to improve government-wide support in implementing children's health legislative
mandates and outreach, including providing children's environmental health expertise on
interagency activities and coordinating EPA expertise. OCHP also coordinates with ATSDR to
support provision of training and hands on consultations with doctors, nurses, and other medical
professionals to address issues of potential exposures of children to environmental contaminants,
such as lead and asthma triggers including mold and vermin. OCHP also works with other federal
agencies to address emerging risks to children's environmental health and supports federal
interagency information exchange and cooperation, such as on lead and wildfires.
Environmental Justice
Presidential Executive Order (EO) 14008 on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad
enhanced and expanded several important means of interagency coordination and collaboration
related to environmental justice. E014008 elevated the existing Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice, formerly chaired by EPA, to the White House Environmental Justice
777

-------
Interagency Council (IAC), chaired by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). This
executive order also established a White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(WHEJAC) to provide advice and recommendations to the IAC and CEQ on environmental justice
recommendations for the entirety of the executive branch of the federal government. The IAC will
be the primary venue for inter-agency coordination of executive branch federal activities related
to environmental justice. Through the Justice40 initiative, also mandated in E014008, the IAC
will work to achieve the goal that forty percent of federal resources for climate change benefit
disadvantaged communities and will publish an annual public performance scorecard on
implementation by federal agencies. The IAC will likewise coordinate recommendations on
further updates to EO12898 and provide leadership to interagency efforts to address current and
historic environmental injustices. As stipulated in E014008, EPA will provide all support
necessary for administration of the WHEJAC and is one of three agencies charged with providing
support to CEQ for administration of the IAC. EPA also will play a prominent membership role
within the IAC as a participating agency.
National Climate Task Force
The Administrator of EPA is a member of the National Climate Task Force. The Task Force shall
facilitate the organization and deployment of a Government-wide approach to combat the climate
crisis. This Task Force shall facilitate planning and implementation of key Federal actions to
reduce climate pollution; increase resilience to the impacts of climate change; protect public
health; conserve our lands, waters, oceans, and biodiversity; deliver environmental justice; and
spur well-paying union jobs and economic growth. As necessary and appropriate, members of the
Task Force will engage on these matters with State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments;
workers and communities; and leaders across the various sectors of our economy.
The Inspector General
Work with the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE)
EPA's Inspector General is a member of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and
Efficiency (CIGIE), an organization comprised of federal Inspectors General (IGs), GAO, and the
FBI. The CIGIE coordinates and improves the way IGs conduct audits, investigations, and internal
operations. The CIGIE also promotes joint projects of government-wide interest and reports
annually to the President on the collective performance of the IG community.
Activity Coordination, Information Exchange and Training
EPA's OIG coordinates criminal investigative activities with other law enforcement organizations
such as the FBI, Secret Service, and DOJ. In addition, the OIG participates with various inter-
governmental audit forums and professional associations to exchange information, share best
practices, and obtain or provide training. The OIG also promotes collaboration among EPA's
partners and stakeholders in its participation of disaster response and its outreach activities.
778

-------
Collaborative Work with Inspectors General and Other Partners
EPA's OIG initiates and participates in collaborative audits, program evaluations, and
investigations with OIGs of agencies with an environmental mission such as the DOI, USD A, as
well as other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies as prescribed by the IG Act, as
amended.
Statutory Duties
As required by the IG Act, EPA's OIG coordinates and shares information with the GAO. EPA's
OIG currently serves as the Inspector General of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigations Board (CSB). EPA's OIG will continue to perform its duties with respect to the
CSB until otherwise directed.
779

-------
MAJOR MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES
Introduction
As required by the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, the Office of Inspector General identifies
issues they consider as the Environmental Protection Agency's top management challenges and
assesses progress in addressing those challenges. EPA recognizes that management challenges, if
not addressed adequately, may prevent the Agency from effectively meeting its mission. EPA
remains committed to addressing all management issues in a timely manner and to the fullest extent
of its authority.
The following discussion summarizes each of the FY 2020 management challenges identified by
the OIG and presents the Agency's responses.
Maintaining Operations During Pandemic and Natural Disaster Responses
Summary of Challenge: The OIG notes that EPA needs to maintain human health and
environmental protection, business operations, and employee safety during the coronavirus
pandemic andfuture natural disasters.
Agency Response: During this time of COVID-19, the Agency continues to carry out
management, operational, and statutory responsibilities in the face of the unprecedented challenge
represented by the pandemic. EPA worked with its partners and maintained a robust posture for
its Response Support Corps and several Special Teams ready to respond to local and national
emergencies and time-critical removals. Through innovation, flexibility where appropriate to
allow for easier adaptation to the evolving circumstances posed by the virus, and ongoing
systematic implementation of performance management and evaluation, the Agency has continued
its important work. EPA recognizes the current COVID-19 pandemic does create new challenges
for the Agency to successfully respond to its primary mission essential functions and ensure that
its employees are able to operate in a safe manner. The Agency's resilience, robust management
systems and a committed workforce ensures EPA continues to perform its work at a high level.
EPA has relied on its performance management and evaluation system to monitor progress towards
outcomes. The Agency established a variety of organizational goals to drive progress toward key
mission outcomes. These strategic goals articulate clear statements of what the Agency wants to
achieve to advance its mission and address relevant national problems, needs, challenges, and
opportunities. Strategic objectives define the outcome or management impact the Agency is trying
to achieve. Each strategic objective is tracked through long-term performance goals, annual
performance goals, indicators, and other evidence. EPA's FY 2020 Annual Performance Report
(APR) described progress towards the strategic goals and objectives outlined in the FY2018-2022
EPA Strategic Plan, available at https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan. This APR
presented results toward the annual performance goals and targets in the Agency's FY 2020
Annual Performance Plan (APP) and Congressional Justification (CJ) as updated in the FY 2021
APP and CJ.
780

-------
EPA has made significant progress toward a broad range of policy outcomes including significant
improvements in performance over recent years. The Agency will continue progress toward its
performance targets to improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of its operations.
In parallel, each regional emergency response program is continuously evaluating the availability
of On-Scene Coordinators and Special Teams in light of the COVID-19 pandemic to inform
decision-making of future deployments as necessary. The emergency response program leadership
team will, prior to significant personnel deployments, discuss steps which the Agency can take to
mitigate risk and adhere to the latest field activities guidelines.
The Office of Mission Support (OMS) continues providing leadership on agency operations in the
face of the COVID-19 pandemic: ensuring the safety of the workplace through enhanced cleaning
and safety protocols; implementing CARES Act Section 3610 contracting provisions; supporting
the workforce through implementation of workforce flexibilities; and supporting agency
leadership on the regarding ongoing operations. OMS' goal and focus are to prevent and/or limit
COVID-19 from impeding the mission of the Agency despite the significant and far-reaching
impacts of the pandemic on the Agency and workforce.
Additionally, actions the Agency has adapted to continue to protect human health and the
environment amid the pandemic are highlighted below:
•	Ensuring that all Americans have safe water by working closely with the water sector and the
Agency's federal and state partners to support drinking water and wastewater services that are
essential to helping reduce the spread of COVID-19. The Agency focused its efforts on critical
threats such as water sector worker absenteeism, supply chain disruptions, and financial
impacts - both immediate and long-term.
•	Working closely with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to jointly develop guidance for
cleaning and disinfecting public spaces, workplaces, businesses, and homes.
•	Expanded indoor air quality outreach and technical assistance to schools, tribes and the general
public to improve ventilation and filtration practices as a key component to COVID-19
interventions.
•	Expanded work under the Emerging Viral Pathogens Guidance for Anti-microbial Pesticides
program, where EPA deployed, for the first time against SARS-CoV-2, expedited review of
submissions from companies requesting to add emerging viral pathogen claims to their already
registered surface disinfectant labels.
•	Working with the Federal Tribal Infrastructure Task Force to identify available federal
resources, information, and programs to support tribal water systems.
•	Establishing a variety of compliance monitoring guidance documents and innovative processes
to ensure a continued field presence, albeit virtual.
•	Developing COVID-19 Interim Guidelines for Inspections for conducting inspections during
the COVID-19 public health emergency.
•	Developed key Off-Site Compliance Monitoring Guidance.
•	The Office of Civil Enforcement continues to initiate and conclude civil administrative and
judicial enforcement actions; issue information requests; conduct settlement discussions and
negotiations; and oversee implementation of consent decrees. National policy development
continues with additional efficiencies.
781

-------
•	Establishment of a framework for addressing the impact of the COVID-19 public health
emergency on site remediation enforcement programs. In April 2020, the Office of Land and
Emergency Management and the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance issued a
joint memorandum titled Interim Guidance on Site Field Work Decisions Due to Impact of
COVID-19. The interim guidance addresses response field activities, non-field activities, and
cleanup enforcement issues at "sites across the country under a range of EPA authorities
including, but not limited to, the Superfund Program, RCRA corrective action, TSCA PCB
cleanup provisions, the Oil Pollution Act, and the Underground Storage Tank Program."
•	Developing a plan to maintain Emergency Radiation Air Monitoring Capabilities during a
pandemic.
•	Understanding Adaptations to Nuclear Power Plant Public Safety Plans through working with
state partners and the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Radiological
Emergency Preparedness Program to understand how pandemic considerations were being
considered for public health decision-making for a nuclear power plants.
FY 2021 Spring Update: The coronavirus pandemic necessitated unexpected and sudden changes
to EPA's management, administrative, and programmatic operations to protect human health and
the environment. In early March 2020, EPA switched over to virtual workplace within a span of
two to three weeks. The shift initially had negative impacts on performance. Subsequently, much
of the Agency's work recovered to appropriate performance levels, but some activities have had
sustained negative impacts. EPA will continue to monitor the effects of the pandemic on
performance.
The FY 2020 APR addressed impacts of the pandemic on annual performance goals, finding direct
or indirect impacts on 12 out of the 45 (about 27%) total annual performance goals. The negative
impacts on EPA's performance were primarily in operational areas that require the field presence
of EPA staff, partners, or contractor personnel. In addition, a complete and sudden transition of
EPA's entire workforce and its operations required development and implementation of IT
solutions at a rapid pace. While this rapid transformation created some positive benefits (e.g.,
increased participation in online technical assistance, conversion of paper-based processes to
digital processes, etc.), it also highlighted some of the issues for disadvantaged communities that
could not take advantage of the changes because of their lack of internet connections.
Agency leadership will continue to engage in discussions with program and regional office
leadership on COVID-19 and anticipated potential risks associated with achieving strategic
objectives based on performance data moving forward. Discussions also will continue as part of
the Agency's Quarterly Performance Reviews to assess performance and identify actions to
mitigate impacts as appropriate.
Responsible Agency Official: David Bloom, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief
Financial Officer; and Donna Vizian, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Mission
Support
782

-------
Complying with Key Internal Control Requirements
Summary of Challenge: According to the OIG, EPA faces overarching challenges with
implementing and operating internal controls that establish and maintain an effective work
environment. This includes developing internal control risk assessments; ensuring data quality;
and effective operational policies and procedures.
Agency Response: EPA continues to comply with key internal control requirements to ensure
programs are operating effectively and efficiently. The GAO Standards for Internal Control in the
Federal Government (known as the Green Book) serves as the overall framework for establishing
and reporting on the effectiveness of EPA's internal controls. As outlined in the Agency's annual
guidance, program and regional offices are required develop and maintain an Internal Control
Matrix for key program and processes within their respective organizations. The matrix is based
on the Green Book standards and provides the basis for the Assistant and Regional Administrator's
attestation to the soundness of internal controls for the organization. Furthermore, the matrix
describes the risks that may impede the organization from accomplishing its goals and objectives
and includes the associated controls (e.g., policies, procedures, measures, etc.) in place to address
the identified risks. In developing the matrix, program and regional offices consider all risk
factors—strategic, operational, and fraud—and assess the impact and likelihood to the program if
the risk were to occur. Additionally, the Agency performs risk assessments for its strategic
objectives and uses the results of the assessment to inform the Agency Risk Profile, which is
required by OMB Circular A-123, Management's Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management
and Internal Control.
To strengthen the Agency's process, OCFO developed a template to assist organizations in
identifying internal controls and conducting reviews of those controls. The template allows
managers and staff to describe the details of the review and the procedures used to determine if
controls are operating as intended and sufficient in responding to risk identified. In addition, this
year, as part of its oversight responsibility for EPA's Management Integrity Program, OCFO plans
to perform internal control reviews in various program offices. The results of the review, as well
as information reported in the templates, will assist in determining whether controls are designed,
implemented, and operating effectively. The results also will support development of the
Administrator's statement of assurance on the overall effectiveness of internal controls for the
agency.
In response to the OIG audit, EPA Needs to Conduct Risk Assessments When Designing and
Implementing Programs, Report 20-P-0170, May 18, 2020, the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer has made available on-line training modules that provide awareness and key information
on EPA's Management Integrity Program. The training is targeted for managers and staff and
focuses on roles and responsibilities for implementing and overseeing internal controls. The AA
and RA must report completion of the training for all appropriate staff in their annual assurance
letters.
In reference to improving data quality, under the Clinger Cohen Act (1996), the EPA Chief
Information Officer in the Office of Mission Support has delegated authority for environmental
information including oversight responsibility for the Agency's Quality Program, as described in
783

-------
the Agency's Quality Policy and Procedure. The Agency's Quality Program is decentralized and
implemented by the program offices and regions with specific responsibilities for assuring the
quality of environmental information collected, produced, evaluated or used is appropriate for their
programmatic decisions. OMS has developed a long-term corrective action plan to address the 15
findings identified in the OIG audit, EPA Needs to Address Internal Control Deficiencies in the
Agencywide Quality System, Report No. 20-P-0200, June 22, 2020. The plan includes steps to
increase effective information and communication.
Responsible Agency Officials: Jeanne Conklin, Controller, Office of the Controller; and Jeff
Wells, Director, Office of Enterprise Information Programs
EPA Needs to Improve Oversight of States, Territories and Tribes Authorized to Accomplish
Environmental Goals
Summary of Challenge: The OIG notes that while the Agency has made important progress, it
continues to face challenges in improving oversight of and results from state, territory, and tribal
environmental programs that EPA oversees.
Agency Response. EPA takes its role seriously in overseeing state, territorial, and tribal
implementation of federal environmental programs to carry out EPA's mission of protecting public
health and the environment. Effective oversight is critical in protecting all Americans, including
those in communities that have been historically marginalized, underserved, and overburdened by
pollution. Upon being confirmed and sworn in, Administrator Michael S. Regan made a strong
commitment to EPA's oversight role in remarks before the Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS) on March 16, 2021, stating: "[T]he heart of our work is about protecting public health and
the environment. There will be certain baseline standards we're going to expect states to meet to
ensure we're fulfilling that responsibility."
Protection of the environment and of communities is a shared goal and responsibility of EPA and
the states, territories, and tribal nations who are our co-regulator partners. Federal oversight is
important to identify any program deficiencies and implement solutions to ensure human health
and the environment are protected in every zip code. To this end, Acting Assistant Administrator
of the Office of Environment Compliance Assurance (OECA) Larry Starfield issued a
memorandum on April 30, 2021, regarding strengthening EPA's enforcement in communities with
environmental justice concerns. He stated: "[I]f there is a situation where a community's health
may be impacted by noncompliance, and our co-regulator is not taking timely or appropriate
action, we should not hesitate to step in and take necessary action." EPA's role is to ensure the
protection of communities regardless of where a person lives.
The Agency is committed to meeting its oversight responsibilities, addressing disparities, and
executing on its mission for all Americans. The Agency has oversight programs for several major
programs that continuously oversee states, territories, and tribes, such as the OECA's State Review
Framework reviews. Additionally, the Office of Water's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit reviews, the Office of Water's Safe Drinking Water Act annual reviews,
the Office of Air and Radiation's Clean Air Act Title V program reviews, and the Office of Land
and Emergency Management's RCRA program reviews all contribute to this goal. In 2021, EPA
784

-------
plans to reconvene the Agency's internal Oversight workgroup to review and consider
improvements to its oversight programs.
Additional activities to address state oversight issues include the following:
•	OECA reviews all state CAA Title V, CWA NPDES, and RCRA Subtitle C compliance and
enforcement programs once every five years through the State Review Framework.
•	In 2018, OECA initiated a focused effort to complete recommended state improvement actions
identified in the prior reviews, resulting in the completion of 619 out of 669 (over 90%)
recommendations by mid-2021.
Responsible Agency Official: Robin Richardson, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator,
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
EPA Needs to Improve Its Workload Analysis to Accomplish Its Mission Efficiently and
Effectively
Summary of Challenge: According to the OIG, EPA has not 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. EPA needs ongoing and comprehensive workload analysis to
adequately respond to and prepare for future staffing gaps and shortages in essential positions.
Agency Response: EPA has addressed the workforce planning requirements of 5 CFR Part 250,
Subpart B, Strategic Human Capital Management by completing the EPA FY 2019 Human Capital
Operation Plan (HCOP) and issuing its FY 2020-2023 Workforce Plan. EPA also is using
workload analyses as one factor in planning workforce levels and examining critical processes.
EPA is implementing the Agency's FY 2020-2023 Workforce Plan, which describes human capital
strategies for full-time, part-time, "at will," and wage employees and will update its HCOP after
OPM issues new guidance this summer. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) is
assessing ongoing workload efforts and examining critical work processes through Monthly
Business Reviews and Lean implementation efforts. The Agency discusses workforce and
workload planning strategies at senior level management meetings.
EPA is updating its workforce and workload strategies following the new Administration's
priorities and initiatives. Specific activities include:
•	Developed and deployed a Talent Enterprise Diagnostic Tool to assess skills gaps, especially
those among EPA's agency-specific Mission Critical Occupations.
•	Developed, maintained, and enhanced EPA's Workforce Demographics Dashboard and
Diversity Dashboard.
•	Hired additional workforce planning staff.
•	Reviewing planned outcomes and processes for three ongoing workload projects (Superfund
FTE, Regional labs, and air regional work) to gather lessons learned and insights that could
apply to broader processes, such as data collection, methodology, program variability, and
implementation strategies.
785

-------
•	EPA's workforce planning performance metrics are tracked through periodic reports, such as
HR Stat.
•	Agency workforce and workload strategies are regularly discussed at Agency senior managers'
meetings and process improvements are tracked and reported at managers' Monthly Business
Reviews.
Responsible Agency Official: Maria Williams, Director, Office of Budget
Enhancing Information Technology Security to Combat Cyber Threats
Summary of Challenge: The OIG acknowledges that the Agency continues to initiate actions to
further strengthen or improve its information security program. However, the Agency continues
to face challenges 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.
Without enhanced information technology security, EPA remains vulnerable to existing and
emerging cyber threats.
Agency Response: The Agency is committed to protecting its information and technology assets.
EPA understands the prevalence and complexity of the ever-growing cybersecurity attacks and is
aware of the potential impact to the Agency's mission if information assets are compromised. EPA
has established and implemented processes and internal controls for monitoring and managing
contractor support actions to address concerns associated with this management challenge.
Specific actions taken to address the issue include:
•	Developing and implementing processes within the Office Mission Support operations to
improve management and oversight of audits and corrective actions.
•	Working with the Office of General Counsel to develop standard security language to include
in the Agency's Environmental Protection Agency Acquisitions Guide (EPAAG) Section
39.1.2.
•	Incorporating a verification component for the cybersecurity requirements identified in the
EPAAG 39.1.2 into the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act process.
•	Developing training for contract officers and contract officer representatives on their
responsibilities for identifying contracts that require EPAAG Section 39.1.2 tasks.
•	Establishing a tracking and reporting process that ensures all contractors with access to EPA
information systems complete information security awareness training, and that contractors
with significant security responsibilities also complete role-based training.
•	Ensuring adequate cybersecurity is implemented on contractor operated systems by:
o Assessing systems for proper implementation and operation of adequate cybersecurity
controls.
o Monitoring for timely completion of corrective actions for identified cybersecurity
weaknesses.
o Managing risks at the tactical, mission, and enterprise levels.
In addition, EPA has made significant strides addressing other recommendations highlighted in
the OIG report. Specific actions the Agency has taken include:
786

-------
•	Worked with the Department of Homeland Security regarding the risk of the Electronic
Manifest System. As a result, EPA maintained its original categorization but agreed to review
the system's categorization annually and when significant changes to the system occur.
•	Replaced the incident tracking system and implemented controls in the new system to protect
the confidentiality and sensitivity of Personal Identifiable Information and enforce password
management requirements according to federal and agency guidance.
•	Documented the CIO's role in information security through policy and procedures.
•	Documented and implemented controls to validate plans of action and milestones for
vulnerability testing results.
•	Established a process to periodically review security settings for the Agency' s tracking system
to validate whether they meet standards and implemented audit logging capabilities to capture
data changes and a log review process.
The processes implemented to address the OIG recommendations were reviewed by the OIG for
the FY 2019 Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) report and found to be
adequate. Additionally, agencywide metrics related to IT security are tracked monthly and
discussed in senior leader Monthly Business Reviews.
Responsible Agency Official: Tonya Manning, Director, Office of Information Security and
Privacy
EPA Needs to Improve Risk Communication to Provide Individuals and Communities with
Sufficient Information to Make Informed Decisions to Protect their Health and the
Environment
Summary of Challenge: OIG acknowledges that the Agency has taken important steps to improve
risk communication, however, challenges remain across many EPA programs. The Agency needs
more effective risk communication strategies to guide, coordinate, and evaluate its communication
efforts to convey potential hazards.
Agency Response: Risk communication goes to the heart of EPA's mission of protecting human
health and the environment. The Agency is committed to ensuring that it carries out effective risk
communication by sharing meaningful, understandable, and actionable information on human
health and environmental risks with the American public. To build a consistent and effective
approach to risk communication, EPA hired a senior risk communication advisor in November
2019 who is responsible for coordinating risk communication across the Agency.
Over the past year and a half, EPA has made significant progress in the important work of
improving the quality and consistency of our risk communication. This work will be continued
with an additional focus on the Biden Administration's priorities of environmental justice and
climate change. Recent progress in this area includes:
787

-------
Completing a research-based risk communication framework (the SALT Framework) to be used
by anyone who communicates risk on behalf of the Agency.
This framework, which is based on a process of Strategy, Action, Learning and Tools, provides a
research-based approach and best practices for communicating our work to the American people.
When followed consistently, it will strengthen the effectiveness of EPA's risk communication
across our many programs and roles. It is a critical first step in addressing the current issues EPA
faces in risk communication and has the potential to transform the way the Agency carries out its
mission of protecting human health and the environment.
The SALT framework is now being used to integrate and improve risk communication planning,
practice, and outcomes across all EPA offices, regions, and programs. For example, it is being
used to develop strategies for communicating on COVID, ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions, and
Superfund decisions at sites across the Nation. It also is being used to begin conversations with
our external state and academic partners on how to improve all of our organizations' risk
communication, including the Environmental Council of States, the Society for Risk Analysis, the
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, and others.
Providing additional risk communication tools for staff and managers and updating the Agency's
risk communication website.
Along with the SALT framework, the Agency has developed additional tools for risk
communicators which are now housed an updated and revamped agency website. This website
includes an updated definition of risk communication, videos explaining key concepts in risk
communication, and several case studies on how to use the SALT framework to achieve improved
outcomes.
Establishing a premier, scientifically grounded risk communication training platform to conduct
ongoing training for EPA staff and managers.
EPA developed a risk communication training platform in partnership with COMPASS Science
Communication, a nationally recognized leader in science communication training, which was
built on best practices from an EPA-specific risk communication research review. It is designed to
use the best available technologies for virtual adult learning and uses a participatory learning
model which is validated in education research to increase the consolidation of learning, the
development of new skills, and network formation.
This 20-hour course is available to EPA staff and managers on an ongoing basis and has been used
to train 170 people as of June 2021. It covers governing principles from the science of risk
communication as well as topics such as: understanding your audience, building trust, effective
messaging, the process for risk communication at EPA, and the SALT framework. The course also
includes participatory exercises, role plays, and scenarios with outside experts.
Each class is structured around a specific hazard, audience, or Agency function with the goal of
building knowledge, skills, and networks around best practice in risk communication. Classes
completed as of June 2021 have included a focus on community engagement under EPA's in land
788

-------
and emergency management programs, lead contamination, PFAS issues, environmental justice,
tribal partnerships, and EPA's role in agriculture and addressing wildfires. Staff are chosen to
participate based on their roles communicating risk on these issues and topics and have included
staff from every office and region with a strong focus on staff who do direct community
engagement as a part of their roles.
EPA plans to use this course to train an additional 250 staff and managers in FY 2022. Future plans
also include cross-training partners from other agencies whether federal, state, local, or tribal.
Leveraging the science of risk communication through active engagement with the scientific
community both inside EPA and in academia.
To both share the work we are doing and learn from the scientific and academic community, EPA's
senior risk communications advisor serves on interagency and interorganizational groups focused
on social, behavioral, and economic sciences. In addition, over the next year EPA will be working
with the academic community to conduct research on the American public's knowledge of and
feelings about today's environmental issues, so that we can better meet their needs in our risk
communication.
Establishing a cross-agency work group with over 100 participants to increase coordination and
build the Agency's risk communication tools.
The EPA Risk Communication Work Group, which is open to all interested Agency staff, serves
as a forum for keeping up to date on what's going on across the Agency in risk communication. In
addition, smaller Work Group Action Teams are working with program experts from across the
Agency to build out EPA's risk communication tools portfolio to support the SALT Framework.
Responsible Agency Officials: Nancy Grantham, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator,
Office of Public Affairs
EPA Needs to Improve on Fulfilling Mandated Reporting Requirements
Summary of Challenge: OIG believes that the Agency faces challenges in tracking and submitting
reports mandated by law that contain key program information for Congress, the Administrator,
and the public.
Agency Response. In 2018, OIG identified an instance where the Agency had not fulfilled a
mandatory, statutorily required report to Congress, and has identified other instances where reports
were not issued to Congress. The two reports that OIG identified have since been issued. OIG
believes the Agency should make a comprehensive effort to identify the causes for programs not
issuing required reports, implement targeted plans to address the causes, and complete and issue
any remaining missing reports. OIG also believes the Agency should continue to work with
Congress to eliminate the requirements of duplicative or unnecessary reports from our authorizing
statutes.
789

-------
EPA has taken the corrective actions identified in the 2018 OIG Report regarding the BEACH Act
Report, which has since been issued to Congress. The Office of Congressional and
Intergovernmental Relations' Associate Administrator issued a memorandum in March 2018 to
remind EPA's Assistant Administrators and Associate Administrators that the Agency's standard
practice is to track reports to Congress by using the Office of Policy Action Development Process
Tracker. OCIR, OP, and OCFO meet regularly to address tracking and preparing for the upcoming
replacement of the ADP Tracker. Additionally, the Agency continues to provide a list of the
unnecessary and duplicative reports that EPA suggests eliminating from its statutes to OMB as
part of the budget process, in consultation with Congress. The Agency believes this effort will
improve tracking of Reports to Congress so that statutory requirements are met in the future.
Additional activities to address this issue include the following:
•	During FY 2021 OCIR and OCFO set up weekly meetings and leveraged the new Agency
software via Teams on status of Agency inventory of reports to Congress.
•	During FYs 2019, and 2020, and 2021, held internal meetings between OCIR, OP, and OCFO
to coordinate the tracking of reports to Congress, to prepare for when the ADP Tracker is
replaced, and to discuss the potential for a having a single means of tracking statutorily
mandated reports to Congress and those required by appropriations law.
•	Continue working with program offices to update the list of unnecessary or duplicative reports
as part of the FY 2022 and 2023 budget proposals.
Responsible Agency Official: Robin Richardson, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator,
Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Integrating and Leading Environmental Justice Across the Agency and Government
Summary of Challenge: OIG believes that EPA needs to enhance its consideration of
environmental justice across programs and regions and provide leadership in this area for the
federal government.
Agency Response: The Agency continues to address issues and concerns raised by GAO and
EPA's OIG regarding its leadership of integration of environmental justice within EPA. This
includes leadership from OP and OEJ senior representatives on EPA initiatives to implement
President Biden's Executive Order (EO) 13985 on Racial Equality and EO 14008 on Tackling the
Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, and participation on inter-agency and intra-agency working
groups. Additionally, on April 7, 2021, EPA Administrator Michael Regan issued an agencywide
memo titled Our Commitment to Environmental Justice which clearly communicated his priority
of centering EJ throughout all of EPA's activities. Administrator Regan's memo contained specific
instructions on integration of EJ within programmatic activities, full enforcement of our
environmental and civil rights laws, emphasis on meaningful engagement and consultation, and
reinforcing our leadership in implementing President Biden's executive direction. Efforts to
address EPA-specific recommendations made in the GAO report issued October 2019 entitled,
Federal Efforts Need Better Planning, Coordination, and Methods to Assess Programs are now
largely guided through implementation of EO 14008 and EO 13985. Many of the responsibilities
for leadership on the inter-agency items relevant to those GAO recommendations now lie with the
White House Council on Environmental Quality. EPA is supporting and engaging CEQ on
790

-------
providing government-wide leadership on those recommendations. Additionally, the Agency is
reviewing recommendations made by OIG.
Responsible Agency Official: Philip Fine, Principal Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of
Policy; and Matthew Tejada, Office Director, Office of Environmental Justice
791

-------
EPA USER FEE PROGRAMS
In FY 2022, EPA will have several user fee programs in operation. These user fee programs and
proposals are referenced below. In FY 2022, the Agency also will conduct a review to determine
whether fees should be assessed for programs that provide special benefits to recipients beyond
those that accrue to the general public, in accordance with OMB Circular A-25.
Current Fees: Pesticides
Fee collection authority exists under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act of
1988, as amended by the Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2018 (P. L. 116-8)
("PRIA-4"), which was passed in March 2019. PRIA-4 reauthorizes these fee authorities through
fiscal year 2023 and adjusts fee amounts for certain registration activities.
Pesticides Maintenance Fee (7 U.S.C. §136a-l(i))
The Maintenance Fee provides funding for the registration review programs, and a certain
percentage supports the processing of applications involving inert ingredients and expedited
processing of some applications, such as fast track amendments. PRIA-4 reauthorizes collection
of this fee through FY 2023 and raises the collection target by $3.2 million to an average collection
of $31 million over five years of PRIA-4 authorization.
Enhanced Registration Services (7 U.S.C. §136w-8(b))
Entities seeking to register pesticides for use in the United States pay a fee at the time the
registration action request is submitted to EPA, setting specific timeframes for the registration
decision service. This process has introduced new pesticides to the market more quickly. PRIA-4
reauthorizes collection of these fees through FY 2023 and adjusts fee amounts for certain types of
registrations. In FY 2022, EPA expects to collect approximately $20 million from this fee program.
Current Fees: Other
Clean Air Part 71 Operating Permits Program
Title 40 CFR Part 71 § 71.9 authorizes and establishes requirements for the Clean Air Part 71
program - a comprehensive Federal air quality operating permit program for air pollution control
agencies that do not have a delegated Title V program on charging and collecting user fees, as
required by Section 502(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act. All sources subject to the operating permit
requirements of Title V shall have a permit to operate that assures compliance with all applicable
requirements. The owners or operators shall pay annual fees that are sufficient to cover the permit
program costs, in accordance with the procedures described in this section.
Service Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA Fees Rule)
On June 22, 2016, the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act" (P.L. 114-
182) was signed into law, amending numerous sections of TSCA, including providing authority
792

-------
for the establishment of a new, broader TSCA User Fee program that replaces and expands the
former Section 5 Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fee. Section 26 of TSCA authorizes EPA to
collect user fees to offset 25 percent of the Agency's full costs for implementing TSCA Sections
4, 5, 6, and 146. Fees are charged for: issuance of Test Orders, Test Rules and Enforceable Consent
Agreements under TSCA Section 4; submission of Pre-Manufacturing Notices, Significant New
Use Notices and Microbial Commercial Activity Notices and certain submissions for exemptions
under TSCA Section 5; and development of EPA-Initiated Risk Evaluations and Manufacturer-
Requested Risk Evaluations (MRREs) under TSCA Section 6.
EPA promulgated the TSCA User Fee Rule in October 20197 and collected $2.7 million in fee
revenue in FY 2019 from Section 5 submissions. In FY 2020, $3 million in fee revenue was
collected from Section 5 submissions as well as $2.5 million from two Section 6 MRREs for
chemicals on the TSCA Work Plan. In FY 2021, fee collections are expected to be $30.0 million
($3 million from Section 5, $25.65 million from 19 of the 20 Section 6 EPA-Initiated Risk
Evaluations, $1.25 million from one Section 6 MRRE for a TSCA Work Plan chemical, and less
than $0.1 million from Section 4 Test Orders. However, nearly $17 million of the collections for
the 19 Section 6 Risk Evaluations is not due to be paid until September 2, 2021, rendering the
funds un-usable by EPA until early FY 2022. In FY 2022, EPA anticipates collecting similar
amounts for Sections 4 and 5 ($3.1 million) and $2.5 million for an assumed two Section 6 MRREs
for TSCA Work Plan Chemicals, subject to potential fee level changes. EPA will apportion FY
2021 Section 6 collections over the risk evaluation lifecycle (3-3.5 years). TSCA requires EPA to
update the Fees every three years8. Fees collected/projected to be collected in FY 2019 through
FY 2021 equated to approximately 14 percent of associated expenditures for those three fiscal
years, well below the 25 percent target. EPA proposed revisions to the fee rule in December 2020
but plans to re-propose in light of public comments; as such, EPA now expects to finalize an
amended fee rule in FY 2022 (which may not go into effect until FY 2023).
Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program Fee
This fee is authorized by the Clean Air Act of 1990 and is administered by the Office of
Transportation and Air Quality. Fee collections for manufacturers of light-duty vehicles, light- and
heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles began in August 1992. In 2004, EPA promulgated a rule that
updated existing fees and established fees for newly regulated vehicles and engines. The fees
established for new compliance programs are paid by manufacturers of heavy-duty and nonroad
vehicles and engines, including large diesel and gas equipment (earthmovers, tractors, forklifts,
compressors, etc.), handheld and non-handheld utility engines (chainsaws, weed-whackers, leaf-
blowers, lawnmowers, tillers, etc.), marine (boat motors, watercraft, jet-skis), locomotive, aircraft
and recreational vehicles (off-road motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, snowmobiles) for in-use
testing and certification. In 2009, EPA added fees for evaporative emissions requirements for
nonroad engines. EPA intends to apply certification fees to additional industry sectors as new
programs are developed. In FY 2022, EPA expects to collect approximately $23.6 million from
this fee program based upon a projection of the original rulemaking cost study adjusted for
6	TSCA, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, Section 26(b) (1) and (4)
7	https://www.epa.gov/tsca-fees/fees-administration-toxic-substances-control-act
8	https://www.epa.gov/tsca-fees/fees-administration-toxic-substances-control-act
793

-------
inflation. EPA is not currently authorized to expend these collected funds but is proposing such
authority.
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act (P. L. 112-195) provides EPA with
the authority to establish a program to finance, develop, and operate a system for the electronic
submission of hazardous waste manifests supported by user fees. In accordance with the Act, EPA
established the e-Manifest Program. EPA finalized the user fee rule, Hazardous Waste
Management System: User Fees for the Electronic Hazardous Waste Manifest System and
Amendments to Manifest Regulations, in December 2017, and the e-Manifest system launched in
June 2018.
In FY 2022, EPA will continue to operate the e-Manifest system and the Agency anticipates
collecting and depositing approximately $27 million in e-Manifest user fees into the Hazardous
Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund. Based upon authority to collect and spend e-Manifest
fees provided by Congress in annual appropriations bills, the fees will fully support the e-Manifest
program, including the operation of the system, necessary program expenses, and future
development costs.
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program Account (WIFIA) Program Fees
The FY 2022 Budget requests authorization for the Administrator to collect and obligate fees
established in accordance with the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014. These
funds shall be deposited in the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program Account
(WIFIA) and remain available until expended. WIFIA fee regulations were first promulgated in
FY 2017. Fee revenue will be used for the cost of contracting with expert services such as financial
advisory, legal advisory, and engineering firms.
The requested WIFIA program fee expenditure authority would be in addition to the $8 million
request for administrative and operations expenses. Fee revenue does not take the place of the
request for WIFIA administration. The appropriated administrative level and the anticipated fee
revenue are both needed to successfully implement the WIFIA Program. In FY 2022, EPA
estimates that $13 million in WIFIA fees could be collected.
Fee Proposals: Other
FIFRA and PRIA Fee Spending Restrictions
Current statutory language in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
and Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) restricts what activities EPA can fund from
collections deposited in the Reregi strati on and Expedited Processing Revolving Fund and Pesticide
Registration Fund. The FY 2022 request carries forward the proposed statutory language from the
FY 2021 President's Budget to expand the range of activities that may be funded with these fees.
Language for pesticide registration service fees is included in the proposed Administrative
Provisions; since pesticide maintenance fees are mandatory, separate language has been prepared
for those fees that will be transmitted at a later date.
794

-------
Working Capital Fund
In FY 2022, the Agency will be in its 26th year of operation of the Working Capital Fund (WCF).
The WCF is a revolving fund authorized by law to finance a cycle of operations in which the costs
for goods or services provided are charged to the users. The WCF operates like a commercial
business within EPA where customers pay for services received, thus generating revenue.
Customers include EPA program and regional offices and other federal agencies. The WCF
mechanism provides an efficient method for a full cost approach to agency programs. EPA's WCF
was implemented under the authority of Section 403 of the Government Management Reform Act
of 1994 and the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997. EPA received permanent
WCF authority in the Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1998.
The Modernizing Government Technology (MGT) Act9 provided additional authority for
information technology development activities in agency working capital funds.10
EPA's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) initiated the WCF in FY 1997 as part of an effort to: 1) be
accountable to agency offices, the Office of Management and Budget, and Congress; 2) increase
the efficiency of the administrative services provided to program offices; and 3) increase customer
service and responsiveness. The Agency has a WCF Board which provides policy and planning
oversight and advises the CFO regarding the WCF financial position. The Board, chaired by a
management representative within the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, is comprised of 22
voting members from program and regional offices.
In FY 2022, there will be 12 agency activities provided under the WCF. These are the Agency's
information technology services, agency postage, Cincinnati voice services, background
investigations, and enterprise human resources IT services managed by the Office of Mission
Support; financial and administrative systems, employee relocations, and a budget formulation
system managed by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer; the Agency's Continuity of
Operations (COOP) site managed by the Land and Emergency Management program; regional
information technology service and support managed by EPA Region 8; legal services managed
by the Office of General Counsel; and multimedia and agency servicing contracts managed by the
Office of the Administrator.
The Agency's FY 2022 budget request includes resources for these 12 activities in each National
Program Manager's submission, totaling approximately $300 million. These estimated resources
may be adjusted during the year to incorporate any program office's additional service needs
during the operating year. To the extent these increases are subject to Congressional
reprogramming notifications, the Agency will comply with all applicable requirements. In FY
2022, the Agency will continue to perform relocation services for other federal agencies, delivering
high quality services external to EPA.
The Agency anticipates that there may be minor increases and decreases in FY 2022 due to several
IT improvements, including increased cloud computing, improved network infrastructure,
cybersecurity requirements, continuous diagnostic and mitigation program implementation, and
9	The MGT Act was enacted as part of the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act on December 12, 2017.
10	EPA determined that the Agency's existing WCF meets the requirements of the MGT Act. EPA's WCF provides a range of
integral IT infrastructure, application, and hosting services. In addition, EPA's WCF possesses the structure and governance
framework to satisfy the requirements for the Technology Modernization Fund (TMF) identified in the MGT Act.
795

-------
discovery services. Other funding shifts have been included in the FY 2022 WCF plan that relate
to the necessary telecommunications and computer support needed by every employee. As part of
an overall review and rebalancing of these costs, funds have been shifted across programs to reflect
FTE changes as well.
796

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
ACRONYMS for STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The following is not an exhaustive list of [U. S.] statutory authorities but includes those commonly referred
to by acronym in this document.
ACE: Air, Climate, and Energy
ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act
ADEA: Age Discrimination in Employment Act
AEA: Atomic Energy Act, as amended, and Reorganization Plan #3
AHERA: Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act
AHPA: Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act
AIM: American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2019
APA: Administrative Procedures Act
ARP: American Rescue Plan
ARRA: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
ASHAA: Asbestos in Schools Hazard Abatement Act
ASTCA: Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act
AWIA: America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018
BEACH Act of 2000: Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act
BRERA: Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act
BUILD Act: Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development Act
CAA: Clean Air Act
CAAA: Clean Air Act Amendments (1970 and 1990)
CARES: Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
CCA: dinger Cohen Act
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (1980)
CFOA: Chief Financial Officers Act
CICA: Competition in Contracting Act
CRA: Civil Rights Act
CSA: Computer Security Act
CWA: Clean Water Act (1972)
CWPPR: Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act of 1990
CZARA: Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments
797

-------
CZMA: Coastal Zone Management Act
DERA: Diesel Emissions Reduction Act
DPA: Deepwater Ports Act
DREAA: Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
ECRA: Economic Cleanup Responsibility Act
EFOIA: Electronic Freedom of Information Act
EISA: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EO: Executive Order
EPAct: Energy Policy Act of 2005
EPAA: Environmental Programs Assistance Act
EPCA: Energy Policy and Conservation Act
EPCRA: Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (1986)
ERD&DAA: Environmental Research, Development and Demonstration Authorization Act
ESA: Endangered Species Act
ESECA: Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act
FACA: Federal Advisory Committee Act
FAIR: Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act
FASA: Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (1994)
FCMA: Fishery Conservation and Management Act
FEPCA: Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act of 1972, enacted as amendments to FIFRA
FFDCA: Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
FFMIA: Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996
FGCAA: Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act
FIFRA: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (1972)
FLPMA: Federal Land Policy and Management Act
FMFIA: Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (1982)
FOIA: Freedom of Information Act
FPA: Federal Pesticide Act
FPAS: Federal Property and Administration Services Act
FQPA: Food Quality Protection Act (1996)
FRA: Federal Register Act
FSA: Food Security Act
FSMA: Food Safety Modernization Act
798

-------
FTTA: Federal Technology Transfer Act
FUA: Fuel Use Act
FWCA: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
FWPCA: Federal Water Pollution and Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act [CWA])
GISRA: Government Information Security Reform Act
GMRA: Government Management Reform Act
GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act (1993)
GPRAMA: Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010
HMTA: Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
HSWA: Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, enacted as amendments to RCRA
IGA: Inspector General Act
IPA: Intergovernmental Personnel Act
IPIA: Improper Payments Information Act
ISTEA: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
IT: Information Technology
ITMRA: Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996-aka Clinger/Cohen Act
MPPRCA: Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act of 1987
MPRSA: Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act
NAWCA: North American Wetlands Conservation Act
NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA: National Historic Preservation Act
NISA: National Invasive Species Act of 1996
ODA: Ocean Dumping Act
OPA: Oil Pollution Act of 1990
OWBPA: Older Workers Benefit Protection Act
PBA: Public Building Act
PFCRA: Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act
PHSA: Public Health Service Act
PLIRRA: Pollution Liability Insurance and Risk Retention Act
PPA: Pollution Prevention Act
PR: Privacy Act of 1974
PRA: Paperwork Reduction Act
PREA: Pesticide Registration Extension Act of 2012 (also known as PRIA 3)
799

-------
PRIA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Act of 2003
PRIA 4: Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2018
PRIRA: Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act
QCA: Quiet Communities Act
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, enacted as amendments to SWDA
RFA: Regulatory Flexibility Act
RICO: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
RLBPHRA: Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act
SARA: Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SBLRBRERA: Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization and
Environmental Restoration Act
SBREFA: Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
SICEA: Steel Industry Compliance Extension Act
SMCRA: Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
SOS2.0: Save Our Seas Act 2.0
SPA: Shore Protection Act of 1988
SWDA: Solid Waste Disposal Act
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
UMRA: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UMTRLWA: Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Land Withdrawal Act
USMCA: United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement
USTCA: Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act
VIDA: Vessel Incidental Discharge Act
WIFIA: Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
WIIN: Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act
WQA: Water Quality Act of 1987
WRDA: Water Resources Development Act
WSRA: Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
WWWQA: Wet Weather Water Quality Act of 2000
800

-------
FY 2022 STAG CATEGORICAL PROGRAM GRANTS
Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses
	(Dollars in Thousands)	
(¦mill Tilli-
Still iilk-
Ri'iipk-nls
l'.li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
.Ulll;il
Dull ;irs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2021
Kiiiii'k'd
Diilkirs
(XIOIMI)
i \ 2022
I'rvsitkill's
lilld^i'l
Dulkirs
(X1000)
State and
Local Air
Quality
Management
CAA, Section
103.
Air pollution
control
agencies as
defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA
S/L monitoring and
data collection
activities in support of
the PM2.5 monitoring
network and associated
program costs.
$35,974.8
$41,904.8
$58,660.0
State and
Local Air
Quality
Management
CAA, Section
103.
Air pollution
control
agencies as
defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA
S/L monitoring and
data collection
activities in support of
air toxics monitoring.
$7,589.8
$7,488.2
$20,000.0
State and
Local Air
Quality
Management
CAA, Section
103.
Air pollution
control
agencies as
defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA
S/L monitoring
procurement activities
in support of the
NAAQS.
$5,217.1
$4,197.8
$6,500.0
801

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk'
ki'iipii'iiis
I!li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
.Ulual
Dull ;irs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2021
I!ii;kU'(I
Dollars
(\IOOO)
i \ 2022
Pivsiili-iu's
lilld^l'l
Dollars
(\IOOO)
State and
Local Air
Quality
Management
CAA, Sections
103, 105, 106.
Air pollution
control
agencies as
defined in
section 302(b)
of the CAA;
Multi-
jurisdictional
organizations
(non-profit
organizations
whose boards
of directors or
membership is
made up of
CAA section
302(b) agency
officers and
whose
mission is to
support the
continuing
environmental
programs of
the States);
Interstate air
quality control
region
designated
pursuant to
section 107 of
the CAA or of
implementing
section 176A,
or section 184
NOTE: only
the Ozone
Transport
Commission
is eligible.
Carrying out the
traditional prevention
and control programs
required by the CAA
and associated
program support costs,
including all
monitoring activities,
including PM 2.5
monitoring and
associated program
costs (Section 103
and/or 105);
Coordinating or
facilitating a multi-
jurisdictional approach
to carrying out the
traditional prevention
and control programs
required by the CAA
(Sections 103 and
106); Supporting
training for CAA
Section 302(b) air
pollution control
agency staff (Sections
103 and 105);
Supporting research,
investigative, and
demonstration projects
(Section 103).
$172,898.1
Section 105
grants
$175,270.2
Section 105
grants
$235,640.0
Section 105
grants
$639.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$222,318.8
$639.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$229,500.0
$700.0
Section 106
grants
Total:
$321,500.0
802

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk'
ki'iipii'iiis
l!li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
.Ulual
Dull ;irs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2021
I!ii;kU'(I
Dollars
(\IOOO)
i \ 2022
Pivsiili-iu's
lilld^l'l
Dollars
(\IOOO)
Tribal Air
Quality
Management
CAA, Sections
103 and 105;
Tribal
Cooperative
Agreements
(TCA) in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Tribes;
Intertribal
Consortia;
State/Tribal
College or
University
Conducting air quality
assessment activities to
determine a Tribe's
need to develop a CAA
program; Carrying out
the traditional
prevention and control
programs required by
$9,990.9
Section 103
grants
$9,415.0
Section 103
grants
$17,415.0
Section 103
grants



the CAA and
associated program
costs; Supporting CAA
training for Federally-
recognized Tribes.
$4,000.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$13,990.9
$4,000.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$13,415.0
$4,000.0
Section 105
grants
Total:
$21,415.0
Radon
TSCA, Sections
10 and 306.
State
Agencies,
Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Assist in the
development and
implementation of
programs for the
assessment and
mitigation of radon.
$7,646.0
$7,795.0
$8,951.0
Multipurpose
Grants
Consolidated
Appropriations
Act, 2021, Pub.
L. 116-260; and
all other major
environmental
legislation
including but not
limited to CAA,
CWA, SDWA
and CERCLA
State
Agencies,
Tribes
Implementation of
mandatory statutory
duties delegated by
EPA under pertinent
environmental laws.
$27,033.1
$10,000.0
$10,200.0
Water
Pollution
Control
(Section 106)
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 106;
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Interstate
Agencies
Develop and carry out
surface and ground
water pollution control
programs, including
NPDES permits,
TMDLs, WQ
standards, monitoring,
and NPS control
activities.
$234,493.3
$230,000.0
$234,600.0
Nonpoint
Source (NPS
- Section
319)
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 319(h);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Implement EPA-
approved State and
Tribal nonpoint source
management programs
and fund projects as
selected by the state.
$171,125.7
$177,000.0
$180,000.0
803

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk'
ki'iipii'iiis
l!li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
Ailiiiil
Dull ;irs
(\I000)
i \ 2021
I!ii;kU'(I
Diilkirs
(\I000)
i \ 2022
I'rvsitkiii's
lilld^l'l
Diilkirs
(\I000)
Wetlands
Program
Development
FWPCA, as
amended,
Section 104
(b)(3); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Local
Governments,
Tribes,
Interstate
Organizations,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Non-Profit
Organizations
To develop new
wetland programs or
enhance existing
programs for the
protection,
management, and
restoration of wetland
resources.
$12,922.7
$14,192.0
$14,476.0
Public Water
System
Supervision
(PWSS)
SDWA, Section
1443(a); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Assistance to
implement and enforce
National Primary
Drinking Water
Regulations to ensure
the safety of the
Nation's drinking
water resources and to
protect public health.
$109,075.2
$112,000.0
$122,000.0
Underground
Injection
Control (UIC)
SDWA, Section
1443(b); TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Implement and enforce
regulations that protect
underground sources
of drinking water by
controlling Class I-V
underground injection
wells.
$10,379.5
$11,164.0
$11,387.0
Beaches
Protection
BEACH Act of
2000; TCA in
annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia,
Local
Governments
Develop and
implement programs
for monitoring and
notification of
conditions for coastal
recreation waters
adjacent to beaches or
similar points of access
that are used by the
public.
$8,388.7
$9,619.0
$9,811.0
804

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk'
ki'iipii'iiis
l!li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
.Ulual
Dull ;irs
(\I000)
i \ 2021
I!ii;kU'(I
Dollars
(\I000)
i \ 2022
Pivsiili-iu's
lilld^l'l
Dollars
(\I000)
Hazardous
Waste
Financial
Assistance
Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as
amended by the
Resource
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Development &
Implementation of
Hazardous Waste
Programs.
$107,033.6
$101,500.0
$101,500.0

Conservation
and Recovery
Act § 3011;
Appropriation
Act: FY 2018
(Public Law
115-141);	Save
our Seas 2.0,
2020, Pub. L.
116-224.

In FY 2022, propose to
initiate a pilot for the
construction,
maintenance, and
operation of post-
consumer materials
management or
recycling facilities.


$10,000.0
Pilot for
post-
consumer
materials
management
or recycling
facilities
Total:
$111,500.0
Brownfields
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and Liability Act
(CERCLA§
128(a).
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Establish and enhance
state and tribal
response programs
which will survey and
inventory brownfields
sites; develop
oversight and
enforcement
authorities to ensure
response actions are
protective of human
health and the
environment; develop
ways for communities
to provide meaningful
opportunities for
public participation;
and develop
mechanisms for
approval of a cleanup
plan and verification
and certification that
cleanup is complete.
$47,311.9
$46,195.0
$46,195.0
805

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk' I si-s
n 2020
i \ 2021
i \ 2022

Aiilhorilk-s
Ki'i'i|>k'iils

.Ulual
Dull ;irs
(\I000)
I!ii;kU'(I
Dollars
(\I000)
Pivsiili-iu's
lilld^l'l
Dollars
(\I000)
Underground
Storage Tanks
(UST)
Solid Waste
Disposal Act of
1976, as
amended by the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act of 1986, §
2007(f); Energy
Policy Act, §
9011.
States
Provide funding for
States' underground
storage tanks and to
support direct UST
implementation
programs.
$1,468.5
$1,475.0
$1,505.0
Pesticides
FIFRA, Sections
States, Tribes,
Implement the
$11,364.3
$11,051.0
$11,272.0
Program
Implementati
on
23(a)(1); Federal
Food, drug and
Cosmetic Act
(FDCA); Food
Intertribal
Consortia
following programs
through grants to
States, Tribes,
partners, and
- States
formula
- States
formula
- States
formula

quality
Protection Act
(FQPA);
Endangered
Species Act
(ESA).

supporters for
implementation of
pesticide programs,
including:
Certification and
Training (C&T);
Worker Protection;
$1,278.4
HQ
Programs:
-	Tribal
-PREP
-	School
IPM
$1,243.0
HQ
Programs:
-	Tribal
-PREP
-	School
IPM
$1,268.0
HQ
Programs:
-	Tribal
-PREP
-	Pollinator
Protection



Endangered Species
Protection Program
(ESPP) Field



Activities; Pesticides






in Water; and tribal






Programs.







Total:
Total:
Total:




$12,642.7
$12,294.0
$12,540.0
806

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk'
I!li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
i \ 2021
i \ 2022

Aiilhorilk-s
ki'iipii'iiis

.Ulual
Dull ;irs
(\IOOO)
I!ii;kU'(I
Dollars
(\IOOO)
Pivsiili-iu's
lilld^l'l
Dollars
(\IOOO)
Lead
TSCA, Sections
401-412.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia
Aid states, territories,
the District of
Columbia, and tribes to
$12,403.2
$12,328.0
$12,575.0



develop and implement
404(g) State/
404(g)
404(g) State/



authorized lead-based
Tribal
State/
Tribal



paint abatement
Certification
Tribal
Certification



programs and

Certificatio




authorized Renovation,

n




Repair, and Painting






(RRP) programs. EPA
$1,958.9





directly implements











these programs in all
areas of the country
404(g)
Direct
$1,947.0
$1,986.0



that are not authorized
to do so, and will
Implementati
on
404(g)
Direct
404(g)
Direct



continue to operate the
Implementa
tion
Implementat



Federal Lead-based

ion



Paint Program
Total:




Database (FLPP) of





trained and certified
lead-based paint
$14,362.1
Total:
Total:



professionals.

$14,275.0
$14,561.0
Toxic
Toxic
States,
Assist in developing,
$3,871.9
$4,760.0
$4,855.0
Substances
Substances
federally
maintaining, and



Compliance
Control Act
(TSCA) § 28(a)
and 404(g); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
recognized
Indian Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of
the U.S.
implementing
compliance monitoring
programs for PCBs,
asbestos, and Lead
Based Paint. In
addition, enforcement
actions by 1) the Lead
Based Paint program
and 2) States that
obtained a "waiver"
under the Asbestos
program.



Pesticide
FIFRA §
States,
Assist with
$23,799.4
$24,000.0
$24,480.0
Enforcement
23(a)(1);
Consolidated
Appropriations
Act, 2021, (P.L.
116-260); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Federally-
recognized
Indian Tribes,
Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of
the U.S.
implementation of
cooperative pesticide
enforcement programs.



807

-------
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl:il iilk'
I!li^il>k' I si-s
n 2020
i \ 2021
i \ 2022

Aulliiirilk-s
ki'iipii'iils

Ailiiiil
I!ii;kU'(I
I'rvsitkiii's




Dull ;irs
Diilkirs
lilld^l'l




(\IOOO)
(\IOOO)
Diilkirs






(\IOOO)
Pollution
Pollution
States, Tribes,
Provides assistance to
$4,294.8
$4,630.0
$4,723.0
Prevention
Prevention Act
Intertribal
States and State




of 1990, Section
Consortia
entities (i.e., colleges




6605; TSCA

and universities) and




Section 10; FY

F ederally-recognized




2000

Tribes and intertribal




Appropriations

consortia to deliver




Act (P.L. 106-

pollution prevention




74); TCA in

technical assistance to




annual

small and medium-




Appropriations

sized businesses. A




Acts.

goal of the program is






to assist businesses and






industries with






identifying improved






environmental






strategies and solutions






for reducing waste at






the source.



Tribal
Indian
Tribal
Plan and develop
$67,289.5
$66,250.0
$77,575.0
General
Environmental
Governments,
Tribal environmental



Assistance
General
Intertribal
protection programs.



Program
Assistance
Consortia





Program Act (42






U.S.C. § 4368b);






TCA in annual






Appropriations






Acts.





National
Reorganization
States, U.S.
Helps States, U.S.
$8,557.1
$9,336.0
$9,523.0
Environmenta
Plan No. 3 of
Territories,
Territories, Tribes, and



1 Information
1970, 84 Stat.
Federally
intertribal consortia



Exchange
2086, as
Recognized
develop the



Network
amended by
Tribes and
information



(NEIEN, aka
Pub. L. 98-80,
Native
management and



"the
97 Stat. 485
Villages,
technology (IM/IT)



Exchange
(codified at Title
Interstate
capabilities they need



Network")
5, App.) (EPA's
Agencies,
to participate in the




organic statute)
Tribal
Exchange Network, to





Consortia,
continue and expand





Other
data-sharing programs,




Conso lidated
Agencies with
and to improve access




Appropriations
A x ^ r\ i
Related
to environmental




Act, 2021
Environmenta
information.




(Public Law
1 Information





116-260)
Activities.




808

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2022 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
PROGRAM PROJECTS BY PROGRAM AREA
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
n 21120 Wlu;il»
n 21121 r.ii:i> led
n 21122 I'll-
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
$7,537.7
$7,326.8
$8,974.6
$98,543.9
$122,383.0
$6,793.0
$7,895.0
$7,154.0
$96,783.0
$118,625.0
$8,800.0
$9,997.0
$10,222.0
$110,169.0
$139,188.0
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
$39.9
$1,795.6
$3,402.1
$235.5
$5,473.1
$157.0
$1,735.0
$3,096.0
$161.0
$5,149.0
$157.0
$2,340.0
$4,039.0
$168.0
$6,704.0
Enforcement
Forensics Support
$13,726.2
$14,000.0
$14,114.0
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$12,926.2
$27,021.6
$443.0
$40,390.8
$10,380.0
$24,852.0
$501.0
$35,733.0
$14,342.0
$25,545.0
$501.0
$40,388.0
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
$3,473.7
$3,072.0
$3,121.0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
8,812.7
$67,500.0
8,533.0
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
$3,109.5
$1,757.7
$379.9
$5,247.1
$2,803.0
$2,207.0
$876.0
$5,886.0
$2,840.0
$2,230.0
$970.0
$6,040.0
n 2022 I'll-
lilld^i'l \.
M 2021 Liiiiilcd
$2,007.0
$2,102.0
$3,068.0
$13,386.0
$20,563.0
$0.0
$605.0
$943.0
$7.0
$1,555.0
$114.0
$3,962.0
$693.0
$0.0
$4,655.0
$49.0
$1,033.0
$37.0
$23.0
$94.0
$154.0
809

-------
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
n 21122 I'll-
M 21122 l'iv»	I i lid ml \.
M 20211 WluaK M 2021 liuilrd	Uncivil	M 21121 I'liaclril
$95,350.8
$95,250.0
$156,210.0
$60,960.0
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
$108,506.9
$112,250.0
$116,588.0
$4,338.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Health and Environmental Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Endocrine Disrupters
Computational Toxicology
Research: Chemical Safety for
Sustainability (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
$143,191.3
$38,921.5
$52,257.7
$95,707.7
$134,629.2
$133,000.0
$37,482.0
$51,859.0
$89,518.0
$127,000.0
$137,412.0
$41,412.0
$54,738.0
$93,818.0
$135,230.0
$4,412.0
$3,930.0
$19,833.8	$16,253.0	$16,851.0	$598.0
$23,616.2	$21,406.0	$22,229.0	$823.0
$2,879.0
$4,300.0
$8,230.0
Water: Human Health Protection
Drinking Water Programs
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Total, Science & Technology
$4,265.0
$4,992.0
$750,441.8
$4,364.0
$7,500.0
$729,329.0
$6,444.0
$829,972.0
$2,080.0
-$7,500.0
$100,643.0
Environmental Programs & Management
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
$15,503.2
$103,054.5
$21,244.6
$131,855.1
$4,872.4
$8,347.0
$284,876.8
$13,153.0
$97,000.0
$20,733.0
$138,020.0
$4,633.0
$8,711.0
$282,250.0
$18,138.0
$103,689.0
$26,618.0
$257,808.0
$10,901.0
$18,000.0
$435,154.0
$4,985.0
$6,689.0
$5,885.0
$119,788.0
$6,268.0
$9,289.0
$152,904.0
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
$2,680.4
$8,912.4
$2,616.2
$10,934.8
$3,136.0
$7,661.0
$2,404.0
$11,750.0
$3,167.0
$10,342.0
$2,908.0
$13,837.0
$31.0
$2,681.0
$504.0
$2,087.0
810

-------
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Brownfields
Brownfields
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
Geographic Programs
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Geographic Program: Other
Lake P ontchartrain
S.New England Estuary (SNEE)
Geographic Program: Other (other activities)
Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other
Great Lakes Restoration
Geographic Program: South Florida
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
TRI / Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Executive Management and Operations
n wiiui- n 2021 r.iiiuird
$25,143.8	$24,951.0
$23,332.9
$98,418.4
$162,505.0
$50,326.2
$9,482.5
$15,337.8
$237,651.5
$87,690.4
$13,833.9
$13,387.0
$20,642.6
$947.0
$5,244.8
$3,672.1
$9,863.9
$346,143.7
$2,739.6
$5,907.2
$32,861.0
$533,069.3
$4,935.3
$990.3
$4,175.9
$10,101.5
$13,660.5
$12,225.3
$13,639.3
$50,346.8
$24,000.0
$102,500.0
$168,341.0
$51,275.0
$11,838.0
$16,943.0
$248,397.0
$87,500.0
$20,000.0
$15,000.0
$30,400.0
$1,900.0
$5,500.0
$3,000.0
$10,400.0
$330,000.0
$6,000.0
$8,922.0
$33,750.0
$541,972.0
$4,145.0
$909.0
$4,959.0
$10,013.0
$13,736.0
$13,206.0
$12,902.0
$46,836.0
n 2022 I'll-
liudgcl
$30,254.0
$24,197.0
$132,350.0
$194,623.0
$59,121.0
$293,862.0
$18,966.0
$566,572.0
$90,500.0
$22,447.0
$20,000.0
$40,000.0
$1,932.0
$6,252.0
$3,050.0
$11,234.0
$340,000.0
$7,155.0
$12,000.0
$35,000.0
$578,336.0
$4,557.0
$1,008.0
$5,139.0
$10,704.0
$14,003.0
$13,450.0
$15,971.0
$54,792.0
n 2022 I'll-
IiMil Ht-I \.
n 2021 r.iiiuird
$5,303.0
$197.0
$29,850.0
$26,282.0
$7,846.0
$282,024.0
$2,023.0
$318,175.0
$3,000.0
$2,447.0
$5,000.0
$9,600.0
$32.0
$752.0
$50.0
$834.0
$10,000.0
$1,155.0
$3,078.0
$1,250.0
$36,364.0
$412.0
$99.0
$180.0
$691.0
$267.0
$244.0
$3,069.0
$7,956.0
811

-------
Environmental Education
Exchange Network
Small Minority Business Assistance
Small Business Ombudsman
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency
Coordination
Subtotal, Information Exchange / Outreach
International Programs
US Mexico Border
International Sources of Pollution
Trade and Governance
Subtotal, International Programs
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Civil Rights Program
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
Regional Science and Technology
Science Advisory Board
Regulatory /Economic-Management and Analysis
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
n wiiui- n 2021 r.iiiuird
$6,388.7
$14,906.1
$1,363.2
$2,145.2
$8,580.0
$14,084.0
$1,680.0
$1,778.0
$6,209.9	$6,173.0
$120,885.0	$118,975.0
$2,955.4
$6,240.6
$5,608.4
$14,804.4
$6,190.4
$86,699.8
$92,890.2
$11,398.1
$4,524.5
$800.2
$9,468.4
$49,878.3
$14,475.0
$1,060.5
$3,903.2
$12,643.4
$108,151.6
$70,751.8
$285,437.3
$27,433.0
$47,042.8
$26,319.8
$456,984.7
$1,887.3
$60,580.8
$37,650.6
$2,837.0
$6,746.0
$5,292.0
$14,875.0
$8,285.0
$82,715.0
$91,000.0
$9,475.0
$4,975.0
$864.0
$9,205.0
$49,595.0
$15,865.0
$638.0
$3,205.0
$12,421.0
$106,243.0
$76,718.0
$285,441.0
$32,247.0
$46,229.0
$25,430.0
$466,065.0
$1,546.0
$60,181.0
$39,543.0
n 2022 I'll-
liudgcl
$8,615.0
$14,226.0
$1,884.0
$1,929.0
$6,247.0
$131,117.0
$3,192.0
$8,006.0
$6,080.0
$17,278.0
$14,116.0
$86,744.0
$100,860.0
$17,719.0
$5,704.0
$1,141.0
$13,946.0
$71,895.0
$18,315.0
$1,174.0
$3,475.0
$13,463.0
$146,832.0
$81,563.0
$297,748.0
$34,121.0
$53,254.0
$28,730.0
$495,416.0
$1,546.0
$60,929.0
$39,952.0
n 2022 I'll-
IiMil Ht-I \.
n 2021 r.iiiuird
$35.0
$142.0
$204.0
$151.0
$74.0
$12,142.0
$355.0
$1,260.0
$788.0
$2,403.0
$5,831.0
$4,029.0
$9,860.0
$8,244.0
$729.0
$277.0
$4,741.0
$22,300.0
$2,450.0
$536.0
$270.0
$1,042.0
$40,589.0
$4,845.0
$12,307.0
$1,874.0
$7,025.0
$3,300.0
$29,351.0
$0.0
$748.0
$409.0
812

-------
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
n 20211 Wliul-
$6,173.0
$106,291.7
n 2021 liuil.cl
$7,730.0
$109,000.0
n 2022 I'll-
lilldgrl
$7,792.0
$110,219.0
n 2022 I'll-
IiMil Ht-I \.
n 2021 l.iiiitlt-tl
$62.0
$1,219.0
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
$143.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
$35,671.5
$64,884.9
$9,051.3
$109,607.7
$38,453.0
$70,465.0
$9,982.0
$118,900.0
$38,836.0
$71,082.0
$10,202.0
$120,120.0
$383.0
$617.0
$220.0
$1,220.0
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disruptors
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
$11,030.3
$11,475.6
$0.0
$67,369.7
$11,859.6
$101,735.2
$7,533.0
$12,558.0
$0.0
$60,280.0
$13,129.0
$93,500.0
$7,565.0
$12,588.0
$0.0
$75,519.0
$13,385.0
$109,057.0
$32.0
$30.0
$0.0
$15,239.0
$256.0
$15,557.0
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
LUST/UST
$10,841.7
$11,250.0
$11,443.0
$193.0
Water: Ecosystems
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
Wetlands
Subtotal, Water: Ecosystems
$30,863.9
$20,212.0
$51,075.9
$31,822.0
$19,300.0
$51,122.0
$31,963.0
$24,899.0
$56,862.0
$141.0
$5,599.0
$5,740.0
Water: Human Health Protection
Beach / Fish Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Subtotal, Water: Human Health Protection
$1,337.2
$101,007.3
$102,344.5
$1,584.0
$106,903.0
$108,487.0
$1,804.0
$118,265.0
$120,069.0
$220.0
$11,362.0
$11,582.0
Water Quality Protection
Marine Pollution
Surface Water Protection
Subtotal, Water Quality Protection
$9,153.2
$201,289.7
$210,442.9
$9,468.0
$206,882.0
$216,350.0
$12,072.0
$218,582.0
$230,654.0
$2,604.0
$11,700.0
$14,304.0
Congressional Priorities
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Total, Environmental Programs & Management
$15,000.0
$2,713,792.7
$21,700.0
$2,761,550.0
$0.0
$3,427,494.0
-$21,700.0
$665,944.0
813

-------
Inspector General
n 2020 Wliul- n 2021 l.iiiitIt-il
n 2022 I'll-
Uncivil
n 2022 I'll-
IiMil Ht-I \.
n 2021 l.iiiitIt-il
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
$43,076.0
$43,500.0
$54,347.0
$10,847.0
Total, Inspector General
$43,076.0
$43,500.0
$54,347.0
$10,847.0
Building and Facilities
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
$14,325.7
$6,676.0
$6,676.0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Total, Building and Facilities
$32,216.3
$46,542.0
$27,076.0
$33,752.0
$56,076.0
$62,752.0
$29,000.0
$29,000.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
$2,323.3
$1,985.0
$2,612.0
$627.0
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
$10,498.1
$11,586.0
$11,800.0
$214.0
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$1,054.3
$1,000.0
$1,006.0
$6.0
Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Environmental Justice
Forensics Support
Superfund: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Subtotal, Enforcement
$7,292.3
$566.3
$1,257.6
$179,284.5
$7,155.8
$195,556.5
$7,647.0
$826.0
$1,145.0
$156,773.0
$7,424.0
$173,815.0
$7,786.0
$5,841.0
$1,164.0
$159,542.0
$7,574.0
$181,907.0
$139.0
$5,015.0
$19.0
$2,769.0
$150.0
$8,092.0
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$32,992.9
$994.6
$33,987.5
$33,020.0
$1,030.0
$34,050.0
$33,264.0
$1,030.0
$34,294.0
$244.0
$0.0
$244.0
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
$1,341.2
$1,328.0
$1,328.0
$0.0
814

-------
n 2020 Wliul- n 2021 liuil.cl
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Health and Environmental Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Superfund Cleanup
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
Total, Hazardous Substance Superfund
$927.6
$15,168.6
$16,096.2
$1,014.2
$628.3
$1,642.5
$24,772.5
$82,734.0
$24,356.1
$6,094.4
$3,561.3
$141,518.3
$15,501.1
$3,882.1
$4,115.6
$7,997.7
$203,758.9
$8,824.2
$23,280.8
$617,575.2
$853,439.1
$1,280,955.8
$659.0
$13,826.0
$14,485.0
$832.0
$443.0
$1,275.0
$26,561.0
$68,727.0
$23,800.0
$6,202.0
$3,210.0
$128,500.0
$16,463.0
$12,824.0
$0.0
$12,824.0
$190,000.0
$7,700.0
$21,800.0
$589,000.0
$808,500.0
$1,205,811.0
n 2022 I'll-
liudgcl
$5,659.0
$15,202.0
$20,861.0
$857.0
$450.0
$1,307.0
$27,720.0
$72,801.0
$30,519.0
$6,842.0
$3,390.0
$141,272.0
$16,634.0
$12,876.0
$0.0
$12,876.0
$195,489.0
$7,839.0
$22,189.0
$882,400.0
$1,107,917.0
$1,533,814.0
n 2022 I'll-
IiMil Ht-I \.
n 2021 r.iiiicird
$5,000.0
$1,376.0
$6,376.0
$25.0
$7.0
$32.0
$1,159.0
$4,074.0
$6,719.0
$640.0
$180.0
$12,772.0
$171.0
$52.0
$0.0
$52.0
$5,489.0
$139.0
$389.0
$293,400.0
$299,417.0
$328,003.0
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$657.3
$620.0
$634.0
$14.0
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$354.8
$1,066.0
$416.0
$836.0
$434.0
$837.0
$18.0
$1.0
815

-------



n 2022 I'iv.

n 2020 Wliiah
n 2021 r.iiiicird
liudgcl
Acquisition Management
$155.9
$132.0
$132.0
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$1,576.7
$1,384.0
$1,403.0
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)



LUST/UST
$9,942.8
$9,470.0
$9,603.0
LUST Cooperative Agreements
$57,441.7
$55,040.0
$55,040.0
LUST Prevention
$25,666.5
$25,369.0
$25,369.0
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
$93,051.0
$89,879.0
$90,012.0
Research: Sustainable Communities



Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$520.6
$320.0
$327.0
Total, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$95,805.6
$92,203.0
$92,376.0
Inland Oil Spill Programs



Compliance



Compliance Monitoring
$181.4
$139.0
$2,142.0
Enforcement



Civil Enforcement
$2,237.2
$2,413.0
$2,462.0
Oil



Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
$15,571.8
$16,200.0
$16,454.0
Operations and Administration



Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$640.2
$682.0
$683.0
Research: Sustainable Communities



Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$428.2
$664.0
$668.0
Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs
$19,058.8
$20,098.0
$22,409.0
State and Tribal Assistance Grants



State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)



Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
$29,186.0
$36,186.0
$36,186.0
Brownfields Projects
$94,203.0
$90,982.0
$130,982.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
$1,632,518.2
$1,638,826.0
$1,870,680.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
$1,320,783.1
$1,126,088.0
$1,357,934.0
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
$26,854.8
$30,000.0
$30,000.0
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
$99,130.1
$90,000.0
$150,000.0
Targeted Airshed Grants
$61,066.4
$59,000.0
$59,000.0
Gold King Mine Water Monitoring
$3,280.3
$4,000.0
$4,000.0
Safe Water for Small & Disadvantaged Communities
$14,182.4
$26,408.0
$41,413.0
n 21122 I'll-
I i Mil m l \.
n 21121 l.iiiitlt-tl
$0.0
$19.0
$133.0
$0.0
$0.0
$133.0
$7.0
$173.0
$2,003.0
$49.0
$254.0
$1.0
$4.0
$2,311.0
$0.0
$40,000.0
$231,854.0
$231,846.0
$0.0
$60,000.0
$0.0
$0.0
$15,005.0
816

-------

n 20211 Wliul-
n 2021 r.iiiiilnl
n 2022 I'll-
limlgcl
n 2022 I'iv.
1 i Mil m l \.
n 2021 r.iiiiilnl
Reducing Lead in Drinking Water
$3,342.0
$21,511.0
$81,515.0
$60,004.0
Lead Testing in Schools
$52,196.5
$26,500.0
$36,500.0
$10,000.0
Drinking Water Infrastructure Resilience and
Sustainability
$0.0
$4,000.0
$9,000.0
$5,000.0
Technical Assistance for Treatment Works
$0.0
$18,000.0
$18,000.0
$0.0
Sewer Overflow Control Grants
$59.2
$40,000.0
$60,000.0
$20,000.0
Water Infrastructure and Workforce Investment
$0.0
$3,000.0
$3,000.0
$0.0
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
$3,336,802.0
$3,214,501.0
$3,888,210.0
$673,709.0
Categorical Grants




Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
$171,125.7
$177,000.0
$180,000.0
$3,000.0
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS)
$109,075.2
$112,000.0
$122,000.0
$10,000.0
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
$222,318.8
$229,500.0
$321,500.0
$92,000.0
Categorical Grant: Radon
$7,646.0
$7,795.0
$8,951.0
$1,156.0
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106)




Monitoring Grants
$18,586.9
$17,267.0
$17,267.0
$0.0
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106) (other activities)
$215,906.4
$212,733.0
$217,333.0
$4,600.0
Subtotal, Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106)
$234,493.3
$230,000.0
$234,600.0
$4,600.0
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development
$12,922.7
$14,192.0
$14,476.0
$284.0
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control
(UIC)
$10,379.5
$11,164.0
$11,387.0
$223.0
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
$12,642.7
$12,294.0
$12,540.0
$246.0
Categorical Grant: Lead
$14,362.1
$14,275.0
$14,561.0
$286.0
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance
$107,033.6
$101,500.0
$111,500.0
$10,000.0
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
$23,799.4
$24,000.0
$24,480.0
$480.0
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
$4,294.8
$4,630.0
$4,723.0
$93.0
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
$3,871.9
$4,760.0
$4,855.0
$95.0
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
$67,289.5
$66,250.0
$77,575.0
$11,325.0
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
$1,468.5
$1,475.0
$1,505.0
$30.0
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
$13,990.9
$13,415.0
$21,415.0
$8,000.0
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
$8,557.1
$9,336.0
$9,523.0
$187.0
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
$8,388.7
$9,619.0
$9,811.0
$192.0
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
$47,311.9
$46,195.0
$46,195.0
$0.0
Categorical Grant: Multipurpose Grants
$27,033.1
$10,000.0
$10,200.0
$200.0
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
$1,108,005.4
$1,099,400.0
$1,241,797.0
$142,397.0
Congressional Priorities




Congressionally Mandated Projects
$1,345.7
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
817

-------
Total, State and Tribal Assistance Grants
n 2020 Wliul- n 2021 liuil.cl
$4,446,153.1	$4,313,901.0
n 2022 I'll-
Uncivil
$5,130,007.0
n 2022 I'll-
IiMil Ht-I \.
n 2021 i.iiiitit-ti
$816,106.0
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
$20,317.5
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
$114.5
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Total, Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System
Fund
$20,432.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Fund
Water Quality Protection
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
$40,760.6
$65,000.0
$80,108.0
$15,108.0
Total, Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
Fund
$40,760.6
$65,000.0
$80,108.0
$15,108.0
Subtotal, EPA
$9,457,018.4
$9,265,144.0
$11,233,279.0
$1,968,135.0
Cancellation of Funds
$0.0
-$27,991.0
$0.0
$27,991.0
TOTAL, EPA
$9,457,018.4
$9,237,153.0
$11,233,279.0
$1,996,126.0
Notes:
Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund account.
FY 2020 Actuals include resources for Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria; USMCA; Disaster Relief Act; and CARES Act.
FY 2021 excludes the American Rescue Plan Act.
Two programs have been renamed: Atmospheric Protection is now Climate Protection; Research: Air and Energy is now Research: Air, Climate
and Energy. One program area has been renamed from the Clean Air Program Area to the Clean Air and Climate Program Area.
818

-------
Eliminated Programs
Eliminated Program Projects
Water Quality Research and Support Grants (FY 2022 President's Budget: $0.0, 0.0 FTE)
This program is proposed for elimination in the FY 2022 President's Budget. Work to advance
water quality protection can be accomplished within core statutory programs funded in the budget
request.
The Program focuses on water quality and water availability research; the development and
application of water quality criteria, the implementation of watershed management approaches,
and the application of technological options to restore and protect water bodies. For training and
technical assistance aspects of the Program, States have the ability to develop technical assistance
plans for their water systems using Public Water System Supervision funds and set-asides from
the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF). For research and development components
of the Program, EPA was instructed to award grants on a competitive basis, independent of the
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program, and give priority to not-for-profit organizations that:
conduct activities that are national in scope; can provide a twenty-five percent match, including
in-kind contributions; and often partner with the Agency.
819

-------
Expected Benefits of E-Government Initiatives
eRulemaking
The eRulemaking Line of Business is designed to: enhance public access and participation in the
regulatory process through electronic systems; reduce the burden on citizens and businesses in
finding relevant regulations and commenting on proposed rulemaking actions; consolidate
redundant docket systems; and improve agency regulatory processes and the timeliness of
regulatory decisions. EPA has served as the managing partner for this Line of Business; however,
in FY 2020, EPA transferred management services to the General Services Administration (GSA).
EPA continues to be involved as a partner agency.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
2020
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,000.0
2021
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,063.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,330.0
Geospatial Line of Business
The Geospatial Line of Business is an intergovernmental project to improve the ability of the
public and government to use geospatial information to support the business of government and
facilitate decision-making. This initiative reduces costs and improves agency operations in several
areas.
With the implementation of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure Strategic Plan, the geospatial
data sets known as National Geospatial Data Assets (NDGA) and associated analytical services
have become available on the National Geospatial Platform. These additional datasets and services
are easily accessible by federal agencies, their partners, and stakeholders. EPA uses the National
Geospatial Platform to obtain data and services for internal analytical purposes as well as to publish
outward-facing geospatial capabilities to the public.
While the Department of the Interior is the managing partner, EPA is a leader in developing the
vision and operational plans for the implementation of the Geospatial Data Act as well as OMB
guidance on Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities and the
National Geospatial Platform which incorporates many national geospatial data and analytical
services for federal agencies, their partners, and stakeholders. EPA is expected to contribute to the
operation of the National Geospatial Platform in FY 2022. The intent is to reduce base costs by
providing an opportunity for EPA and other agencies to share approaches on procurement
consolidation and include shared services for hosting geospatial data, services, and applications.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
2021
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
820

-------
USA Jobs
U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) USA Jobs simplifies the process of locating and
applying for federal jobs. USA Jobs is a standard job announcement and resume builder website.
It is the one-stop for federal job seekers to search for and apply to positions online. This integrated
process benefits citizens by providing a more efficient process to locate and apply for jobs and
assists federal agencies in hiring top talent in a competitive marketplace. The OPM USA Jobs
initiative has increased job seeker satisfaction with the federal job application process and is
helping the Agency to locate highly qualified candidates and improve response times to applicants.
The Agency is required to integrate with USA Jobs, to eliminate the need for applicants to maintain
multiple user IDs to apply for federal jobs across agencies. The vacancy announcement format is
improved for easier readability. The system can maintain up to five resumes per applicant, which
allows them to create and store resumes tailored to specific skills. In addition, USA Jobs has a
notification feature that keeps applicants updated on the status of the application and provides a
link to the Agency's website for detailed information. This self-help USA Jobs feature allows
applicants to obtain up-to-date information on the status of their application upon request.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
2020
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
$130.0
202111
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
$0.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-1218-24
$0.0
Financial Management Line of Business
The Financial Management Line of Business (FM LoB) is a multi-agency effort whose goals
include achieving process improvements and cost savings in the acquisition, development,
implementation, and operation of financial management systems. By incorporating the same FM
LoB-standard processes as those used by central agency systems, interfaces among financial
systems are streamlined, and the quality of information available for decision-making is improved.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
$96.0
2021
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
$88.0
2022
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
$96.0
Grants.gov
The Grants.gov initiative benefits EPA and its grant programs by providing a single location to
publish grant opportunities and application packages, and by providing a single site for the grants
11 As of FY 2021, OMB does not require an EPA contribution for USA Jobs.
821

-------
community to apply for grants using common forms, processes, and systems. EPA believes that
the central site raises the visibility of its grant opportunities to a wider diversity of applicants.
The grants community benefits from savings in postal costs, paper, and envelopes. Applicants save
time in searching for agency grant opportunities and in learning the application systems of various
agencies. In order to streamline the application process, EPA offers Grants.gov application
packages for mandatory state grants (i.e., Continuing Environmental Program Grants).
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-00-04-00-04-0160-24
$331.0
2021
020-00-04-00-04-0160-24
$335.0
2022
020-00-04-00-04-0160-24
$347.0
Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business
The Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business (BFELoB) allows EPA and other
agencies to access budget-related benefits and services. The Agency has the option to implement
LoB-sponsored tools, training, and services.
EPA has benefited from the BFELoB by sharing valuable information on how systems and
software being developed by the LoB have enhanced work processes. This effort has created a
government-only capability for electronic collaboration (Wiki) in which the Budget Community
website allows EPA to share budget information internally, with OMB, and with other federal
agencies. The Agency also made contributions to the Human Capital Workgroup, participating in
development of online training modules for budget activities - a valuable resource to all agency
budget staff. The LoB has developed the capability to have secure, virtual online meetings where
participants can view budget-related presentations from their workspace and participate in the
discussion through a conference line. The LoB provides regularly scheduled symposia as an
additional forum for EPA budget employees.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$110.0
2021
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$120.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$120.0
Federal Human Resources Line of Business
OPM's Human Resources Line of Business (HR LoB) provides the federal government the
infrastructure to support pay-for-performance systems, modernized HR systems, and the core
functionality necessary for the strategic management of human capital.
The OPM HR LoB offers common solutions that enable federal departments and agencies to work
more effectively, and to provide managers and executives across the federal government an
improved means to meet strategic objectives. EPA will benefit by supporting an effective program
822

-------
management activity which evaluates provider performance, customer satisfaction, and
compliance with program goals, on an ongoing basis.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$69.0
2021
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$68.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$69.0
Hiring Assessment Line of Business
The Hiring Assessment Line of Business (Hiring LoB) supports developing, promoting, testing,
and scaling additional processes and technology in support of assessment processes and related
hiring improvements, including government-wide hiring actions and shared certificates. In FY
2022, EPA will create a talent team to help implement data-driven assessment strategies to improve
selection outcomes, to share new approaches and best practices, and to identify government-wide
implementation challenges. Together, talent teams and the Hiring LoB will create a multi-level
effort focused on improving hiring outcomes, both within agencies and across government.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$0.0
2021
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$0.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$66.0
Integrated Acquisition Environment
The Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE) is comprised of a number of government-wide
automated applications and/or databases that streamline the acquisition business process across the
government and support EPA's contracting and grants programs. In FY 2012, GSA began the
process of consolidating the systems into one central repository called the System for Award
Management (SAM). Until the consolidation is complete, EPA leverages some IAE systems via
electronic linkages to EPA's Acquisition System (EAS); other IAE systems are not linked directly
to EAS but benefit the Agency's contracting staff and vendor community as stand-alone resources.
EAS uses SAM vendor data: contracting officers can download vendor-provided representation
and certification information electronically via SAM, which allows vendors to submit this
information once rather than separately for every contract proposal. Additionally, contracting
officers access the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System, which
contains records on contractor performance, including past performance evaluations, and
suspensions and debarments.
Through the IAE, contracting officers also can review Wage Determinations to obtain information
required under the Service Contract Act and the Davis-Bacon Act. EAS links to the Contract
Awards system, expected to be deployed in FY 2021, for submission of contract actions at the time
of award. FPDS provides public access to government-wide contract information. The Electronic
823

-------
Subcontracting Reporting System supports vendor subcontracting data submission for contracts
identified as requiring this information. EPA publishes notices of proposed contract actions
expected to exceed $25 thousand to the Contact Opportunities listing. Vendors use this publicly
available information to identify business opportunities in federal contracting.
The IAE houses Assistance Listings (formerly called Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA), which provides a comprehensive description of all federal assistance including
information on eligibility, how to apply, and matching requirements for public consumption.
Further, EPA's IAE fee supports use of services for standardized obligations and award-related
information reporting for all Federal financial assistance and procurement awards as required by
the Federal Financial Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the DATA Act
of2014.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
2020
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
$720.0
2021
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
$720.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
$720.0
Federal PKI Bridge
Federal Public Key Infrastructure (FPKI) provides the government with a common infrastructure
to administer digital certificates and public-private key pairs, including the ability to issue,
maintain, and revoke public key certificates. FPKI leverages a security technique called Public
Key Cryptography to authenticate users and data, protect the integrity of transmitted data, and
ensure non-repudiation and confidentiality.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$41.0
2021
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$44.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$46.0
Freedom of Information Act Portal
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Improvement Act of 2016 directed the OMB and the
Department of Justice (DOJ) to build a consolidated online request portal that allows a member of
the public to submit a request for records to any agency from a single website. DOJ is managing
the development and maintenance of this National FOIA Portal. EPA and other federal agencies
were asked to contribute to this effort.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2020
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$43.0
2021
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$43.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$37.0
824

-------
Proposed FY 2022 Administrative Provisions
To further clarify proposed Administrative Provisions that involve more than a simple annual
extension or propose a modification to an existing provision, the following information is
provided.
Pesticide Licensing Fee Spending Restrictions
Statutory language in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2018 (PRIA 4), signed into law by the
President on March 8, 2019, restricts what activities EPA can fund from collections deposited in
the Reregi strati on and Expedited Processing Revolving Fund and Pesticide Registration Fund. The
FY 2022 Budget carries forward the proposed statutory language from the FY 2021 President's
Budget to allow registration service fees to be spent on additional activities related to registration
of pesticides, such as processing and review of submitted data, laboratory support and audits, and
rulemaking support.
The following proposed statutory language would ease spending restrictions related to PRIA
registration service fees.
PRIA registration service fees:
The addition of language specifying that PRIA fees collected in FY 2022 will remain available
until expended would simplify aspects of budget execution. The proposal to allow EPA to collect
and spend PRIA fees in FY 2022 and to authorize expanded use of PRIA fee collections is below.
Proposed Language to Add to the FY 2022 Budget
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
pesticide registration service fees in accordance with section 33 of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136w-8): Provided, That such fees collected shall
remain available until expended.
Notwithstanding section 33(d)(2) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 13 6w-8 (d)(2)), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency may
assess fees under section 33 of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136w-8) for fiscal year 2022.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in addition to the activities specified in section 33 of
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136w-8), fees collected
in this and prior fiscal years under such section shall be available for the following activities as
they relate to pesticide licensing: processing and review of data submitted in association with a
registration, information submitted pursuant to section 6(a)(2) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(a)(2)),
supplemental distributor labels, transfers of registrations and data compensation rights,
additional uses registered by states under section 24(c) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136v(c)), data
compensation petitions, reviews of minor amendments, and notifications; review of applications
for emergency exemptions under section 18 of FIFRA (7 U.S. C. 136p) and ensuring data collection
activities, laboratory support and audits; administrative support; risk communication activities;
825

-------
development of policy and guidance; rulemaking support; information collection activities; and
the portions of salaries related to work in these areas.
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest
The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act (Public Law 112-195) provides EPA
with the authority to establish a program to finance, develop, and operate a system for the
electronic submission of hazardous waste manifests supported by user fees. In FY 2022, EPA will
operate the e-Manifest system and the Agency anticipates collecting and depositing approximately
$26 million in e-Manifest user fees into the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund.
Based upon authority to collect and spend e-Manifest fees provided by Congress in annual
appropriations bills, the fees will be utilized for the operation of the system and necessary program
expenses. Fees will fully support the e-Manifest Program, including future development costs. In
recent appropriations acts, Congress has provided an advance on the appropriation for the e-
Manifest Program, to be reduced by the amount of fees collected so as to result in a final fiscal
year appropriation of $0. Because the Program is now fully operational and fee-supported, this
language is no longer necessary. The language to authorize collection and spending of the fees is
below. Language specifying that e-Manifest fees collected in FY 2022 will remain available until
expended would simplify aspects of budget execution.
Propose a modification to an existing provision:
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
fees in accordance with section 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6939g) for fiscal
year 2022, to remain available until expended.
Service Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA Fees Rule)
On June 22, 2016, the "Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act" (P.L. 114-
182) was signed into law, amending numerous sections of the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). The amendments provide authority to the Agency to establish fees for certain activities
under Sections 4, 5, and 6 of TSCA, as amended, to defray 25 percent of the costs of administering
these sections and requirements under Section 14. The amendments removed the previous cap that
the Agency may charge for pre-manufacturing notification reviews. Fees collected under the
TSCA Fees Rule12 will be deposited in the TSCA Service Fee Fund for use by EPA. Fees under
this structure began to be incurred through EPA rulemaking on October 1, 2018 and replace the
former Pre-Manufacturing Notification Fees. In recent appropriations acts, Congress has provided
an advance on the appropriation for the TSCA Program, to be reduced by the amount of fees
collected, so as to result in a final fiscal year appropriation of $0. Because the Program began
collecting fees in FY 2019, this language is no longer necessary and was not included in the FY
2021 President's Budget. Language specifying that TSCA fees collected in FY 2022 will remain
available until expended would simplify aspects of budget execution.
12 For additional information, please refer to: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-fees/fees-administration-toxic-substances-control-act.
826

-------
Propose a modification to an existing provision:
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to collect and obligate
fees in accordance with section 26(b) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S. C. 2625(b)) for
fiscal year 2022, to remain available until expended.
Student Services Contracting Authority
In the FY 2022 Budget, the Agency requests authorization for the Office of Research and
Development (ORD), the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), and the
Office of Water (OW) to hire pre-baccalaureate and post-baccalaureate students in science and
engineering fields. This authority would provide ORD, OCSPP, and OW with the flexibility to
hire qualified students that work on projects that support current priorities, programmatic
functions, and the Agency's environmental goals.
Proposed Language to add to FY 2022 Budget:
For fiscal years 2022 through 2026, the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and
the Office of Water may, using funds appropriated under the headings "Environmental Programs
and Management" and "Science and Technology", contract directly with individuals or indirectly
with institutions or nonprofit organizations, without regard to 41 U.S.C. 5, for the temporary or
intermittent personal services of students or recent graduates, who shall be considered employees
for the purposes of chapters 57 and 81 of title 5, United States Code, relating to compensation for
travel and work injuries, and chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code, relating to tort claims,
but shall not be considered to be Federal employees for any other purpose: Provided, That
amounts used for this purpose by the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and the
Office of Water collectively may not exceed $2,000,000 per year.
Special Accounts and Aircraft for Superfund Response Actions
31 U.S.C. 1343(d) generally states that appropriated funds are not available for aircraft unless "the
appropriation specifically authorizes" its use for such purpose. The FY 2020 Further Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-94) made EPA's annually appropriated Superfund Trust Fund
money available to hire, maintain, and operate aircraft for the purposes of carrying out the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). However,
the FY 2020 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act did not include specific authority for EPA
to also use funds recovered from Potentially Responsible Parties - which are deposited into
Superfund "special accounts" and made available to EPA in a separate, permanent indefinite
appropriation - for aircraft. Accordingly, in the FY 2022 Budget, the Agency requests parity in
authority to use Superfund special account funds for aircraft, so that EPA may carry out CERCLA
response actions funded with special account money in the same manner as the Agency would
with annually appropriated Superfund money.
The appropriation provided by 42 U.S.C. 9622(b)(3) is available for the hire, maintenance, and
operation of aircraft.
827

-------
Changes to EPA's use of the Title 42 Hiring Authority
EPA is requesting changes to its Title 42 Authority to increase the cap from 50 to 75 hires for the
Office of Research and Development (ORD) and to extend the authority to include the Office of
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). This would include a cap of 25 hires. ORD
currently uses this authority to fill highly competitive, PhD-level positions where recruiting
through the GS system is not appropriate. ORD has a robust process for managing the Program,
including an Operations Manual that provides requirements on recruiting, compensation, ethics,
and term renewals. OCSPP faces similar challenges in hiring specialized talent.
Proposed Language to add to FY 2022 Budget:
The Administrator may, after consultation with the Office of Personnel Management, employ up
to seventy-five persons at any one time in the Office of Research and Development and twenty-five
persons at any one time in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention under the
authority provided in 42 U.S.C. 209, through fiscal year 2025.
Working Capital Fund Authority
On December 12, 2017, the Modernizing Government Technology (MGT Act) 13 was signed into
law, authorizing CFO-Act agencies to set up information technology (IT) specific WCFs, which
allows them to fund IT modernization projects and reinvest savings for additional modernization
projects in the future. In the FY 2022 Budget, the Agency requests language be added to clarify
and ensure that EPA has the ability to utilize funds deposited into EPA's WCF to modernize and
develop the Agency's IT systems. The Agency has a well-established WCF where nearly 80
percent of the current service offerings are IT related. Establishing a separate IT WCF would be
duplicative and more costly than to utilize the Agency's existing WCF. By seeking the proposed
authorizing language change, EPA will clarify its existing authority and harmonize it with the
intent of what Congress envisioned in the passage of the MGT Act.
Proposed Language to add to FY 2022 Budget:
The Environmental Protection Agency Working Capital Fund, 42 U.S.C. 4370e, is available for
expenses and equipment necessary for modernization and development of information technology
of, or for use by, the Environmental Protection Agency.
13 For more information on the MGT Act, please refer to Section G of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2018 (Public Law 115-91): https://www.congress, gov/115/plaws/publ91 /PLAW-115publ91 .pdf.
828

-------
MAKING LITIGATION COSTS TRANSPARENT- EQUAL ACCESS FOR JUSTICE ACT (EAJA)
FY 2020*
Date of
Final fee
agreement
or court
disposition
Case Name
Court
Case
Number
Judge
Amount
of Fees
and/or
Costs
Paid
Source of
Funds
Was
amount
negotiated
or court
ordered?
Recipients
Nature of Case and Findings Basis
Hourly
Rate of
Attorney
Hourly
Rate of
Expert
Witness
2/3/2020
Anacostia
Riverkeeper,
et. al. v.
Wheeler
District of
Columbia
Circuit
Court
16-cv-
01651-
CRC
Judge
Christopher
R. Cooper
$39,500
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Anacostia
Riverkeeper,
Inc.,
Kingman
Park Civic
Association,
and Potomac
Riverkeeper
Network
Plaintiffs alleged that EPA's approval
of the District of Columbia's Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for
bacteria violated the Clean Water Act
and the Administrative Procedures
Act. The district court vacated EPA's
approval of the TMDLs and stayed
the vacatur for one year. A settlement
agreement was made for EAJA fees.
Various
Petitioners
requested
rates from
$300/hr to
$500/hr.
None
9/1/2020
Friends of
Animals v.
U.S. EPA
District of
Oregon,
Pendleton
Division
2:17-cv-
01410-
SU
Judge
Michael
Simon
(Magistrate
Judge
Patricia
Sullivan)
$87,000
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Friends of
Animals, Inc.
Plaintiff challenged EPA's denial of
Plaintiffs petition under Section 6(b)
of FIFRA that EPA initiate a Special
Review of the pesticide ZonaStat-H to
determine whether its registration
should be cancelled or revised. The
district court entered an order
adopting the Findings and
Recommendations of the Magistrate
Judge that EPA's denial of Plaintiff s
petition was arbitrary and capricious
and remanded the matter to EPA for
reconsideration. A settlement
agreement was made for EAJA fees.
Various
Petitioners
requested
rates from
$300/hr to
$500/hr.
None
*In the FY 2019 Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 116-6), the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations requested Department of Interior, EPA, and the Forest Service make publicly available the EAJA fee information as specified in the
explanatory statement accompanying Division G of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31). EPA proposes that this document
concludes its reporting obligations for Equal Access to Justice Act fee information and will not be providing a report in its FY 2023 Congressional
Justification unless alerted by Congress to continue.
829

-------
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Plan
Department and component:
Environmental Protection Agency
Purpose: The purpose of this document is to describe the agency's plan for implementing the
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Program. Per 5 CFR 595.107, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) must approve this plan prior to the agency entering into any PCA
service agreement. Changes to this plan must be reviewed and approved by OMB in accordance
with 5 CFR 595.107.
Reporting: In addition to the plan, each year, components utilizing PCA will include their PCA
worksheet in the OMB Justification (OMBJ), typically in September. OMB and OPM will use this
data for Budget development and congressional reporting.
Plan for Implementing the PCA Program:
la) Identify the categories of physician positions the agency has established are covered by
PCA under § 595.103. Please include the basis for each category. If applicable, list and explain the
necessity of any additional physician categories designated by your agency (for categories other
than I through IV-B). List Any Additional Physician Categories Designated by Your Agency:
Pursuant to 5 CFR 595.107, any additional category of physician receiving a PCA, not covered by
categories I through IV-B, should be listed and accompanied by an explanation as to why these
Number of
Physicians
Receiving PCAs
by Category (non-
add)
Category of Physician Position
Covered
by Agency
(mark "x"
if covered)
Basis for Category
2
Category I Clinical Position
X
The small population of EPA Research
Physicians experiences modest turnover.
The value of the physicians' comparability
allowance to EPA is used as a retention
tool. The Agency is told regularly that,
absent the allowance, some EPA
physicians would seek employment at
federal agencies that provide the
allowance.

Category II Research Position



Category III Occupational Health



Category IV-A Disability Evaluation


1
Category IV-B Health and Medical
Admin.
X
The small population of EPA Research
Physicians experiences modest turnover.
The value of the physicians' comparability
allowance to EPA is used as a retention
tool. The Agency is told regularly that,
absent the allowance, some EPA
physicians would seek employment at
830

-------



federal agencies that provide the
allowance.
Physicians' Comparability A1
owance (PCA) Plan (continued)
Explain the recruitment and retention problem(s) for each category of physician in your agency
(this should demonstrate that a current need continues to persist). § 595 of 5CFR Ch. 1 requires
that an agency may determine that a significant recruitment and retention problem exists only if
all of the following conditions apply:
-	Evidence indicates that the agency is unable to recruit and retain physicians for the category;
-	The qualification requirements being sought do not exceed the qualifications necessary for
successful performance of the work;
-	The agency has made efforts to recruit and retain candidates in the category; and
-	There are not a sufficient number of qualified candidates available if no comparability
allowance is paid.
Number of
Physicians
Receiving
PCAs by
Category
(non-add)
Category of Physician Position
Recruitment and retention problem
2
Category I Clinical Position
The small population of EPA Research Physicians
experiences modest turnover. The value of the
physicians' comparability allowance to EPA is used as a
retention tool. The Agency is told regularly that, absent
the allowance, EPA physicians would seek employment
at federal agencies that provide the allowance.

Category II Research Position


Category III Occupational Health


Category IV-A Disability
Evaluation

1
Category IV-B Health and Medical
Admin.
The small population of EPA Research Physicians
experiences modest turnover. The value of the
physicians' comparability allowance to EPA is used as a
retention tool. The Agency is told regularly that absent
the allowance, EPA physicians would seek employment
at federal agencies that provide the allowance.
831

-------
Explain how the agency determines the amounts to be used for each category of physicians.
Number of
Physicians
Receiving
PCAs by
Category
(non-add)
Category of Physician Position
Basis of comparability allowance amount
2
Category I Clinical Position
EPA reviews the experience and technical expertise of
the candidates. Combined with other salary ranges in the
private sector and in review of other federal agencies, the
Agency tries to be within a range that allows the Agency
to retain the employees.

Category II Research Position


Category III Occupational Health


Category IV-A Disability
Evaluation

1
Category IV-B Health and Medical
Admin.
EPA reviews the experience and technical expertise of
the candidates. Combined with other salary ranges in the
private sector and in review of other federal agencies, the
Agency tries to be within a range that allows the Agency
to retain the employees.
Does the agency affirm that the PCA plan is consistent with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 5948 and
the requirements of § 595 of 5 CFR Ch. 1?	
| Yes
832

-------
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet
Department and component:	
| Environmental Protection Agency
Explain the recruitment and retention problem(s) justifying the need for the PCA pay authority.
(Please include any staffing data to support your explanation, such as number and duration of unfilled
positions and number of accessions and separations per fiscal year.)
Historically, the number of EPA Research Physicians is between three and seven positions. This small
population experiences modest turnover. The value of the physicians' comparability allowance to EPA is used
as a retention tool.
In FY 2020, EPA used the PCA to recruit and retain a qualified candidate to fill a vacancy left by a FY 2019
retirement. In FY 2021 and FY 2022, EPA will use the allowance to retain these employees.	
3-4) Please complete the table below with details of the PCA agreement for the following years:

PY 2020
(Actual)
CY 2021
(Estimates)
BY* 2022
(Estimates)
3a) Number of Physicians Receiving PCAs
3
3
3
3b) Number of Physicians with One-Year PCA Agreements
0
0
0
3c) Number of Physicians with Multi-Year PCA Agreements
3
3
3
4a) Average Annual PCA Physician Pay (without PCA
payment)
$182,600
$188,100
$193,700
4b) Average Annual PCA Payment
$24,000
$19,300
$19,300
*BY data will be approved during the BY Budget cycle. Please ensure each column is completed.
5)	Explain the degree to which recruitment and retention problems were alleviated in your agency
through the use of PCAs in the prior fiscal year.	
(Please include any staffing data to support your explanation, such as number and duration of unfilled
positions and number of accessions and separations per fiscal year.)
The Agency is told regularly that, absent the allowance, some EPA research physicians would seek
employment at federal agencies that provide the allowance.	
6)	Provide any additional information that may be useful in planning PCA staffing levels and
amounts in your agency.	
An agency with a very small number of physician positions and a low turn-over rate among them still needs
the allowance authority to maintain the stability of the small population. Those who opt for federal
employment in opposition to private sector employment still want the maximum pay available in the federal
sector. Were it not for the PCA, EPA would regularly lose some of its physicians to other federal agencies
that offer the allowance, both requiring EPA to refill vacant positions and making it more difficult for EPA to
fill those positions. Turn-over statistics should be viewed in this light.	
833

-------
FY 2022: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfer of Resources
Environmental Justice as a National Program Manager
The FY 2022 President's Budget signals EPA's and the Administration's intent to establish a new
National Program Manager (NPM) for Environmental Justice. Currently the Office of
Environmental Justice is located within the Office of Policy within the Office of the Administrator.
The proposed reorganization would elevate environmental justice to ensure it is considered across
regional offices, National Program Managers, and statutory authorities. The head of the new NPM
would be an Assistant Administrator to be nominated by the President and confirmed by the
Senate. Further information and details on the proposed reorganization are under development.
EPA will work closely with the Office of Management and Budget and the Congress on the
proposal.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
In FY 2022, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) is considering a reorganization to
realign functions and staff within OCFO to better position OCFO to meet critical mission
requirements from new statutory requirements of the Evidence Act and increased reporting
requirements as effectively as possible without a corresponding increase in resources. The
reorganization also would realign functions to balance workload across OCFO, eliminate
organizational layers, and consolidate similar or duplicative functions to better leverage personnel
and resources. At this time, OCFO does not foresee any changes to its budget structure. The
proposed reorganization would not affect any other EPA program office or regional office.
Center for Environmental Social Sciences
In FY 2022, the Office of Research and Development (ORD) is considering a reorganization that
would create a Center for Environmental Social Sciences (CESS). This Center will house talent
and innovation uniquely able to address the complex interactions between pollution sources,
exposures, non-chemical stressors, and communities. The Center will employ social science
experts in sociology, economics, anthropology, geography, demography, political science,
decision science, behavioral science, risk and science communication, translational science,
community engagement, and urban planning. Integrated with EPA's capabilities to analyze and
address natural and technological systems, the Center would conduct solutions-focused research,
support meaningful collaborations with communities with environmental justice concerns,
improve risk communication, and tailor science-based tools and solutions for communities.
Office of Mission Support
In FY 2022, the Office of Mission Support (OMS) is considering a reorganization to realign
functions and staff within OMS to better position the office to meet critical mission needs from
834

-------
new requirements associated with President Biden's Executive Orders on climate,14 supporting
underserved communities and acquisition.15 The reorganization also would realign functions to
balance workload across OMS, eliminate organizational layers, and consolidate similar or
duplicative functions to better leverage personnel and resources. This proposed reorganization
would not affect any other EPA program office or regional office.
14	For additional information, please see: https://www.whitehouse. gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/27/executive-
order-on-tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad/.
15	For additional information, please see: https://www.whitehouse. gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-
order-advancing-racial-eauitv-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government/.
835

-------
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office
Dollars in Thousands

FY 2021 Enacted Budget
Pay($K) Non-Pay Total FTE
($K) ($K)
FY 2022 President's Budget
Pay($K) Non-Pay Total FTE
($K) ($K)
NPM Major Office
OA
Immediate Office
$4,019
$448
$4,467
27.0
$6,246
$657
$6,903
39.5

Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
$7,351
$416
$7,767
43.2
$7,587
$414
$8,001
43.2
Office of Public Affairs
$5,428
$325
$5,754
30.5
$5,605
$330
$5,935
30.5
Office of Public Engagement
$1,123
$85
$1,208
8.0
$1,159
$85
$1,244
8.0
Office of Policy
$26,998
$10,676
$37,674
158.7
$46,859
$271,329
$318,188
278.9
Children's Health Protection
$2,548
$2,402
$4,950
13.1
$2,587
$2,452
$5,038
13.1
Environmental Education
$927
$7,053
$7,980
5.2
$939
$7,040
$7,980
5.2
Office of Civil Rights
$3,066
$168
$3,235
20.9
$3,315
$478
$3,793
20.9
Executive Secretariat
$3,674
$155
$3,829
20.1
$3,787
$154
$3,942
20.1
Executive Services
$2,844
$268
$3,112
14.9
$2,936
$2,425
$5,362
14.9
Homeland Security
$2,230
$316
$2,545
11.3
$2,459
$510
$2,969
12.3
Science Advisory Board
$3,132
$334
$3,465
18.7
$3,180
$476
$3,657
18.7
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
$1,797
$739
$2,536
9.7
$1,959
$904
$2,863
9.7
Regional Resources
$42,318
$12,163
$54,481
251.2
$55,426
$13,679
$69,105
327.0
OA TOTAL
$107,454 $35,548 $143,002 632.5
$144,044 $307,487 $451,531 842.0




OAR
Immediate Office
$10,041
$10,282
$20,323
56.7
$10,342
$10,075
$20,417 56.7

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
$56,630
$20,991
$77,621
341.0
$66,028
$125,922
$191,950
383.6
Office of Atmospheric Programs
$38,052
$58,548
$96,600
216.5
$44,735
$53,839
$98,574
253.4
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
$59,030
$42,647
$101,677
336.0
$63,229
$81,607
$144,836
343.3
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
$24,461
$13,324
$37,785
142.0
$31,683
$15,303
$46,985
180.4
Regional Resources
$98,158
$403,841
$501,999
598.5
$110,188
$564,950
$675,138
652.1
OAR TOTAL
$286,372 $549,633 $836,005 1,690.7
$326,205 $851,695 $1,177,900 1,869.5




OCFO
Immediate Office
$1,795
$4,743
$6,538
11.0
$1,947
$5,051
$6,999
11.0

Office of Budget
$6,936
$2,934
$9,869
42.5
$7,524
$2,733
$10,257
42.5
Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability
$4,080
$295
$4,375
25.0
$4,426
$295
$4,721
25.0
Office of Technology Solutions
$8,225
$23,525
$31,749
49.4
$8,923
$23,883
$32,806
49.4
Office of Resource and Information Management
$2,366
$1,684
$4,051
14.5
$2,567
$1,249
$3,816
14.5
Office of the Controller
$22,406
$2,108
$24,514
133.0
$24,308
$2,103
$26,412
133.0
OCFO eEnterprise
$1,093
$568
$1,660
4.8
$1,156
$549
$1,706
4.8
Office of Continuous Improvement
$2,057
$427
$2,484
10.0
$2,139
$451
$2,590
10.0
Regional Resources
$31,392
$2,094
$33,486
203.3
$33,694
$1,965
$35,659
206.3
OCFO TOTAL
$80,349 $38,378 $118,727 493.5
$86,686 $38,280 $124,966 496.5


836

-------

FY 2021 Enacted Budget
Pay Total
($K) Non-Pay ($K) ($K) FTE
FY 2022 President's Budget
Pay Non-Pay Total
($K) ($K) ($K) FTE
NPM Major Office



OCSPP
Immediate Office
$2,275
$1,296
$3,571
12.0
$2,326
$1,230
$3,556
12.0

Office of Pesticide Programs
$58,895
$23,347
$82,242
339.0
$59,744
$23,529
$83,273
339.0
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
$45,967
$24,646
$70,613
295.9
$61,210
$24,790
$86,000
383.5
Office of Program Support
$33,586
$3,383
$36,968
183.0
$34,445
$3,281
$37,725
183.0
Regional Resources
$22,179
$31,145
$53,324
141.8
$22,595
$31,581
$54,176
141.8
OCSPP TOTAL
$162,902 $83,816 $246,718 971.7
$180,319 $84,411 $264,730 1,059.3




OECA
Immediate Office
$6,694
$2,978
$9,672
42.7
$6,839
$2,958
$9,796
42.9

Office of Civil Enforcement
$22,127
$6,342
$28,469
108.2
$24,035
$15,732
$39,767
117.4
Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and Training
$60,941
$9,532
$70,473
305.5
$67,960
$9,531
$77,490
333.4
Office of Compliance
$20,703
$20,131
$40,834
113.2
$21,837
$51,272
$73,109
118.2
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
$2,594
$553
$3,147
14.0
$2,634
$558
$3,192
14.0
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
$13,047
$20,088
$33,135
67.0
$13,243
$21,125
$34,369
67.0
Regional Resources
$294,224
$49,149
$343,373
1,773.1
$305,267
$55,668
$360,935
1,817.8
OECA TOTAL
$420,331 $108,773 $529,104 2,423.7
$441,815 $156,844 $598,659 2,510.7




OGC
Immediate Office
$2,489
$55
$2,544
14.5
$2,212
$55
$2,267
11.0

Air and Radiation Law Office
$7,249
$35
$7,284
44.0
$9,048
$40
$9,088
45.0
Pesticides and Toxic Substances Law Office
$3,460
$36
$3,496
21.0
$4,021
$35
$4,056
26.0
Solid Waste and Emergency Response Law Office
$2,132
$63
$2,195
13.2
$3,418
$82
$3,500
17.0
Water Law Office
$1,644
$10
$1,654
9.3
$4,825
$25
$4,850
24.0
Civil Rights - Title VI
$1,859
$200
$2,059
10.2
$3,358
$553
$3,911
16.7
Other Legal Support
$22,593
$5,354
$27,947
92.6
$25,424
$10,966
$36,390
98.4
Regional Resources
$23,307
$33
$23,340
139.9
$34,589
$832
$35,421
162.7
OGC TOTAL
$64,733 $5,786 $70,519 344.7
$86,894 $12,588 $99,482 400.8




OIG
Immediate Office
$632
$61
$694
3.6
$714
$316
$1,030
4.0
Office of Chief of Staff
$1,739
$356
$2,095
10.0
$1,964
$183
$2,147
11.1
Office of Counsel
$4,268
$407
$4,675
24.5
$4,821
$449
$5,270
27.3
Office of Management
$6,007
$4,519
$10,527
34.4
$6,785
$7,896
$14,681
38.4
Office of Audit
$13,912
$808
$14,720
79.7
$15,715
$1,039
$16,754
88.9
Office of Evaluations
$11,224
$643
$11,867
64.3
$12,678
$840
$13,518
71.7
Office of Investigations
$9,327
$1,181
$10,509
53.5
$10,535
$2,213
$12,748
59.6

OIG TOTAL
$47,110 $7,976 $55,086 270.0
$53,212 $12,935 $66,147 301.0
837

-------

FY 2021 Enacted Budget
Pay Total
($K) Non-Pay ($K) ($K) FTE
FY 2022 President's Budget
Pay Non-Pay Total
($K) ($K) ($K) FTE
NPM Major Office



OITA
Immediate Office
$844
$46
$890
4.5
$953
$81
$1,034
5.0
Office of International Affairs
$6,781
$2,570
$9,350
36.0
$8,383
$2,770
$11,153
44.0
Office of Management and International Services
$2,064
$448
$2,512
11.0
$2,439
$710
$3,149
12.8
American Indian Environmental Office
$3,090
$468
$3,558
16.6
$3,677
$400
$4,077
19.3
Regional Resources
$10,807
$66,902
$77,709
67.6
$13,052
$78,351
$91,403
78.6
OITA TOTAL
$23,586 $70,433 $94,019 135.7
$28,504 $82,312 $110,816 159.7



OLEM
Immediate Office
$8,315 $5,260
$13,574
40.8
$8,383
$5,181
$13,564
40.8
Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
$2,528
$672
$3,200
13.2
$2,558
$707
$3,265
13.2
Office of Communication, Partnership, and Analysis
$2,417
$1,570
$3,987
13.8
$2,437
$1,555
$3,992
13.8
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
$25,860
$69,871
$95,731
144.3
$25,907
$116,289
$142,196
144.3
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
$24,837
$20,192
$45,029
140.7
$25,131
$30,709
$55,840
140.7
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
$3,708
$2,921
$6,630
21.6
$3,755
$3,098
$6,853
21.6
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization
$2,811
$9,526
$12,337
16.6
$2,844
$13,217
$16,061
16.6
Office of Emergency Management
$12,314
$28,748
$41,062
64.2
$12,458
$29,410
$41,868
64.2
Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains
$840
$0
$840
4.0
$846
$0
$846
4.0
Regional Resources
$268,269
$832,301
$1,100,570
1,610.9
$270,068
$1,120,410
$1,390,478
1,610.9
OLEM TOTAL
$351,899 $971,061 $1,322,960 2,070.1
$354,387 $1,320,575 $1,674,962 2,070.1



OMS
Immediate Office
$10,698
$32,604
$43,302
22.6
$4,970 $37,125
$42,095
26.6
Environmental Appeals Board
$3,046
$14
$3,060
14.0
$3,269
$163
$3,432
15.0
Administrative Law Judges
$1,950
$12
$1,962
10.0
$2,167
$161
$2,329
11.0
Office of Resources and Business Operations
$9,974
$2,720
$12,694
62.0
$10,323
$7,484
$17,807
63.0
Office of Human Resources
$18,923
$7,321
$26,244
80.7
$20,948
$5,903
$26,851
89.7
OARM - Research Triangle Park
$14,047
$30,962
$45,008
95.0
$15,245
$29,472
$44,717
100.0
Office of Grants and Debarment
$11,949
$4,257
$16,205
67.0
$13,633
$4,219
$17,852
76.0
OARM - Cincinnati
$9,702
$8,527
$18,229
66.0
$10,614
$10,619
$21,233
70.0
Office of Administration
$16,831
$310,785
$327,615
87.5
$19,599
$353,186
$372,785
87.5
Office of Acquisition Solutions
$32,211
$6,601
$38,812
193.0
$40,014
$6,512
$46,525
233.0
Office of Enterprise Information Programs
$7,612
$7,856
$15,468
40.1
$7,718
$7,818
$15,536
40.1
Office of Information Management
$11,040
$27,767
$38,807
58.7
$11,197
$27,988
$39,185
58.7
Office of Digital Services & Technical Architecture
$4,243
$1,671
$5,915
23.0
$4,297
$1,655
$5,952
23.0
Office of Customer Advocacy, Policy & Portfolio Management
$5,567
$2,093
$7,659
31.0
$5,638
$2,076
$7,714
31.0
Office of Information Security & Privacy
$2,660
$6,162
$8,821
14.1
$2,694
$16,980
$19,675
14.1
Office of Information Technology Operations
$1,947
$4,489
$6,436
9.7
$1,972
$4,474
$6,446
9.7
Regional Resources
$76,143
$50,473
$126,616
464.9
$84,035
$52,215
$136,250
479.4
OMS TOTAL

$238,540 $504,313 $742,853 1,339.3
$258,333 $568,051 $826,384 1,427.8
838

-------

FY 2021 Enacted Budget

FY 2022 President's Budget
NPM
Major Office
Pay
($K)
Non-Pay ($K)
Total
($K)
FTE
Pay
($K)
Non-Pay
($K)
Total
($K)
FTE



ORD
ORD Headquarters
$43,869
$77,554
$121,423
256.2
$44,440
$105,808
$150,248
256.2

Center for Computational Toxicology & Exposure
$41,139
$28,445
$69,584
239.9
$45,358
$34,814
$80,172
261.5

Center for Environmental Measurements & Modeling
$60,773
$36,883
$97,656
354.4
$66,795
$44,786
$111,581
385.1

Center for Public Health & Environmental Assessment
$60,807
$36,662
$97,470
352.6
$66,828
$44,150
$110,978
383.3

Center for Environmental Solutions & Emergency
$42,030
$28,013
$70,044
245.1
$46,260
$34,346
$80,606
266.7

Office of Science Advisor, Policy and Engagement
$11,266
$58,695
$69,961
65.7
$12,973
$51,161
$64,134
74.8

Regional Resources
$31,632
$16,321
$47,953
199.5
$31,866
$16,715
$48,581
199.5

ORD TOTAL
$291,518
$282,573
$574,091
1,713.4
$314,520
$331,780
$646,300
1,827.1




OW
Immediate Office
$11,554
$5,790
$17,343
59.4
$12,391
$6,102
$18,493
63.5

Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
$29,818
$69,242
$99,060
167.6
$34,229
$61,500
$95,729
191.3

Office of Science and Technology
$20,507
$15,388
$35,895
106.8
$21,925
$16,592
$38,517
113.6

Office of Wastewater Management
$24,087
$134,593
$158,680
131.7
$27,326
$169,195
$196,521
148.6

Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
$19,427
$23,895
$43,322
103.8
$21,420
$26,859
$48,279
114.3

Regional Resources
$190,031
$3,987,728
$4,177,759
1,177.2
$206,243
$4,587,620
$4,793,863
1,262.8

OW TOTAL
$295,424
$4,236,636
$4,532,060
1,746.5
$323,534
$4,867,868
$5,191,402
1,894.1

Subtotal Agency Resources
$2,370,218
$6,894,926
$9,265,144
13,831.8
$2,598,453
$8,634,826
$11,233,279
14,858.6

Less Rescission of Prior Year Funds


($27,991)



$0


Reimbursable FTE



465.5



465.5
Total Agency Resources
$2,370,218
$6,894,926
$9,237,153
14,297.3
$2,598,453
$8,634,826
$11,233,279
15,324.1
839

-------
S. 2276 - Good Accounting Obligation in Government Act
Public Law No: 115-414, January 3, 2019
In accordance with the reporting requirements of the Good Accounting Obligation in Government
Act, Agencies are to submit reports on outstanding recommendations in the annual budget
submitted to Congress.
For the FY 2022 budget justification, EPA developed a report listing each open public
recommendation for corrective action from the Office of the Inspector General, along with the
implementation status of each recommendation.
EPA also developed a report listing the status of each open or closed as unimplemented public
recommendation from the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
The Agency's GAO-1G Act Report will be available at the following link:
https ://www. epa. gov/ci.
840

-------
EPA OIG Open Recommendations and Corrective Actions
I V Audit
Nil in her
Recommendations and Corrective Actions
Report
Dale
18-P00240-1
Recommendation: Establish a strategic vision and objectives for
managing the use of citizen science that identifies:
a.	Linkage to the Agency's strategic goals,
b.	Roles and responsibilities for implementation, and
c.	Resources to maintain and build upon existing agency expertise
9/5/18
Corrective Action: The Agency concurs with this
recommendation and will establish an agencywide work group to
establish a more formal strategic vision and objectives for
managing the use of citizen science, including policies,
procedures and clear objectives for how to collect, manage and
use citizen science to support the Agency's mission. Planned:
12/31/20, Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Through appropriate EPA offices, direct
completion of an assessment to identify the data management
requirements for using citizen science data and an action plan for
addressing those requirements, including those on sharing and
using data, data format/standards, and data testing/validation.
Corrective Action: The Agency concurs with this
recommendation and will complete an assessment and action plan
to identify and address data management requirements for citizen
science.
Planned: 12/31/20, Status: Delayed
20-P00062-1
Recommendation: Revise EPA's Crisis Communication Plan to
include a communication process to inform affected communities
about the resolution of community concerns raised during an
emergency.
12/16/19
Corrective Action: Revise EPA's Crisis Communication process
to inform affected communities about the resolution of
community concerns raised during an emergency.
Planned: 12/30/20, Status: Delayed
20-N00128-1
Recommendation: Improve and continue to implement ongoing
risk communication efforts by promptly providing residents in all
communities near the 25 ethylene oxide-emitting facilities
identified as high-priority by EPA with a forum for an interactive
exchange of information with EPA or the states regarding health
concerns related to exposure to ethylene oxide.
3/31/20
Corrective Action: EPA will post quarterly status reports of
outreach activities to the Agency's/Region's Ethylene Oxide
website beginning September 30, 2020. Planned. 09/30/20,
Status: Dispute Resolution
20-P00083-4
Recommendation: Develop performance measures to track
progress toward the Border 2020 Program goals and objectives.
2/18/20
841

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

Corrective Action: OITA will work with NPM's and Regional
Border Offices to identify performance measures for Border 2025
goals and objectives, in line with the Agency LEAN effort and
Bowling Charts.
Planned. 12/31/20, Status: Delayed

Recommendation: Establish and implement management controls
to determine how and when Policy Forum action plans will be
developed.
Corrective Action: Border 2020 Policy Fora did not require action
plans. Policy Fora Action/Activities are being considered in the
Accountability of the Border 2025 framework and will be
reflected or include in the regional action plans, if required.
Planned. 12/31/20, Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Establish and implement management controls
to increase reliability of the Border 2020 Program action plans by
standardizing the action plan format to include key data such as
the relevant goal, objective, sub-objective, requests for proposal,
grant amount and project status.
Corrective Action: OITA does recognize the advantage toward
Action Plans Format standardization. OITA will work with
NPM's and Regional Border Offices to standardize the Border
2025 Action Plans to the extent that it allows flexibility within
RWG's and Task Forces in the spirit of fomenting bottom up
work as each region may have differences. Planned. 12/31/20,
Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Establish and implement management controls
to increase transparency of the Border 2020 Program by
providing stakeholder and public access, as appropriate, to the
program's funded products such as studies, reports, and videos on
EPA's Border 2020 Program website.
Corrective Action: OITA is a NADB Board Member and will
work with the NADB to ensure that project information/products
are made available to the public, in line with grants polices and
regulations. Once this is achieved, EPA can link from the Border
2025 website to those materials on NADB ' s website. Planned.
12/31/20, Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Establish and implement management controls
to increase transparency of the Border 2020 Program by sharing
NADB sub-grantee fact sheets on EPA's Border 2020 Program
website.
Corrective Action: OITA will work with the NAD B to ensure
that Border 2025 project information/products are made available
to the public, in line grants polices and regulations. Once this is
achieved, EPA can link the Border 2025 website to those
842

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

materials on NADB's website. Planned. 12/31/20, Status:
Delayed

17-F00046-130
Recommendation: Work with the Compass Financials service
provider to establish controls for creating and locking
administrative accounts.
11/15/16
Corrective Action: The Agency will work with the service
provider to analyze alternatives for controls and establish an
action plan.
Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: Work with the Compass Financials service
provider to develop and implement a methodology to monitor
accounts with administrative capabilities.
Corrective Action: The Agency will work with the service
provider to analyze alternative methodologies and establish an
action plan. Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
20-F00033-130
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial
Officer evaluate and improve EPA's process for preparing
financial statements, including the resources assigned.
11/19/19
Corrective Action: 1.0 - The Agency makes every effort to
continually review and improve its processes for financial
statement reporting, including the implementation of new
financial statements preparation software in FY 2019. The
Agency will continue to review its processes for preparing
financial statements and identify process improvements to further
strengthen the preparation process.
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial
Officer establish accounting models to properly classify and
record interest, fines, penalties and fees.
Corrective Action: 3.0 - OCFO will work with the Office of Land
and Emergency Management to review the business process for
e-Manifest financial activities and develop a plan for recording
the related activities at the transactional level.
Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial
Officer establish accounting models to properly record e-Manifest
account receivables and recognize earned revenue at the
transaction level.
Corrective Action: 4.0 - OCFO will work with the Office of Land
and Emergency Management to review the business process for
e-Manifest financial activities and develop a plan for recording
the related activities at the transactional level.
Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial
Officer establish accounting models to properly record
843

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

receivables, collections and earned revenue from federal versus
nonfederal vendors.

Corrective Action: 5.0 - OCFO will work with the Office of Land
and Emergency Management to review the business process for
e-Manifest financial activities and develop a plan for recording
the related activities at the transactional level.
Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial
Officer update the accounting models to properly record
collections and not reduce an account receivable account.
Corrective Action: 6.0 - OCFO will work with the Office of Land
and Emergency Management to review the business process for
e-Manifest financial activities and develop a plan for recording
the related activities at the transactional level.
Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
16-P00275-140
Recommendation: We recommend that the Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation: Determine whether
additional action is needed to mitigate any adverse air quality
impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard as required by the
Energy Independence and Security Act.
8/18/16
Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation, and
we acknowledge the statute's requirement to determine whether
additional action is needed to mitigate any adverse air quality
impacts in light of the anti-backsliding study. That study,
discussed in Corrective Action 2, would need to be completed
prior to any such determination taking place. Planned: 9/30/24,
Status: Adhering
Recommendation: We recommend that the Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation: Complete the anti-
backsliding study on the air quality impacts of the Renewable
Fuel Standard as required by the Energy Independence and
Security Act.
Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation, and
we acknowledge the statutory obligation for an anti-backsliding
study under Clean Air Act section 21 l(v) (as amended by EISA
section 209). EPA has already taken a number of time-consuming
and resource-intensive steps that are important prerequisites for
the anti-backsliding study. For example, OAR conducted a
vehicle emissions test program designed to evaluate the impacts
of gasoline properties (including aromatics and ethanol
concentration) on vehicle exhaust emissions,
httos://www3.eoa.gov/otaa/models/moves/eDact.htm. This studv
is the largest, most comprehensive, and most carefully designed
and implemented study to date on the impacts of fuel changes on
844

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

emissions from recent model year gasoline vehicles. Using the
data from this study, OAR then updated the fuel effects model in
its tool for estimating motor vehicle emissions, the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Simulator (MOVES). This update was released in
2014. However, as the OIG report correctly notes, there are
multiple intermediate research steps that still need to be
completed before OAR can plan, fund, and conduct a
comprehensive anti-backsliding study. These steps include
development of baseline, current, and projected scenarios for how
renewable fuels have and might be produced, distributed, and
used to fulfill the RFS requirements, generation of emissions
inventories, and air quality modeling, all of which are time-
consuming and resource-intensive. Furthermore, this work must
be conducted on top of other statutorily required actions under the
RFS Program, many of which are carried out by the same group
of staff and managers.
Planned: 9/30/24, Status: Adhering

18-P00181-140
Recommendation: Define performance measures to assess the
performance of EPA's light-duty vehicle compliance program.
5/15/18
Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation. OAR
currently uses in-use vehicle emissions testing data to track light-
duty emissions compliance over time. OAR will develop
additional performance measures to better monitor emissions
compliance and program success. OAR will implement this
recommendation in four phases: 1) develop the performance
measures; 2) implement, gather data, and evaluate; 3) revise
measures as informed by evaluation, then fully implement
measures; and 4) use those measures to inform program
management moving forward. We project that this will be a three-
year process. Step one will be completed by the end of Q2,
FY2019. Step two will be completed at the end of Q2, FY2020,
and step three will be completed at the end of Q2, FY2021. Step 4
is ongoing.
Planned: 3/31/21, Status: Delayed
19-P00168-140
Recommendation: Define performance measures to assess the
performance of EPA's on-road heavy-duty vehicle and engine
compliance program.
6/3/19
Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation. OAR
currently uses in-use vehicle emissions testing data to track
heavy-duty emissions compliance over time. OAR will develop
additional performance measures to better monitor emissions
compliance and program success. Planned: 9/30/22, Status:
Adhering
845

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

Recommendation: Conduct and document a risk assessment for
the on-road heavy-duty vehicle and engine compliance program
that prioritizes risk and links specific control activities to specific
risks. Update the risk assessment on a scheduled and periodic
basis.

Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation. OAR
currently conducts an informal risk assessment of its heavy-duty
vehicle compliance program and started implementing and
documenting a formal process for both light-and heavy-duty
sectors in 2018 in response to OIG's recommendation for the
light-duty program. OAR will continue to expand and formalize
this process and will develop protocols for its implementation and
documentation.
Planned: 6/30/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: Address the following risks as part of the on-
road heavy-duty vehicle and engine compliance program risk
assessment, in addition to other risks that EPA identifies:
a.	Non-criteria pollutants not being measured.
b.	Level of heavy-duty sector testing throughout the compliance
life cycle.
c.	Marketplace ambiguity over regulatory treatment of rebuilt
versus remanufactured engines.
d.	Different compliance challenges for heavy-duty compression-
ignition and spark-ignition engines.
e.	Lack of laboratory test cell and in-house testing capacity for
heavy-duty spark-ignition engines.
Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation and
will address each of these areas:
•	Non-criteria pollutants not being measured
Response: Under the Clean Air Act, manufacturers are
responsible for measuring and reporting emissions of
nonregulated pollutants. OTAQ does not routinely measure
noncriteria pollutants, but we will work to enhance manufacturer
reporting by establishing a new document type in our Engine and
Vehicle Compliance Information System (EV-CIS) to
collect the manufacturer reports; updating our guidance to
announce the new EV-CIS capacity and to remind manufacturers
of their reporting obligation; and then reviewing and considering
the reported information as part of our ongoing risk assessment
process. Planned Completion Date: End of Q4 2021.
•	Level of heavy-duty sector testing throughout the compliance
life cycle
Response: OTAQ will continue to prioritize testing for all vehicle
and engine sectors, including the HD highway sector, as
846

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

resources allow. We will formally document and periodically
reassess the level of testing as part of our periodic risk
assessment. Planned Completion Date: End of Q3 2021.
•	Marketplace ambiguity over regulatory treatment of rebuilt
versus remanufactured engines
Response: OTAQ believes the regulations are clear on this issue
so we will engage stakeholders to improve understanding of
nomenclature and expectations, and we will work to educate
manufacturers about ambiguity resulting from their inappropriate
use of terminology. Planned Completion Date: End of Q1 2021.
•	Different compliance challenges for heavy-duty compression-
ignition and spark-ignition engines
Response: This recommendation concerns the technical
differences between SI and CI engines, and the resulting different
challenges and tradeoffs in controlling emissions for the two
types of technology. We will formally document and periodically
reassess concerns about different compliance incentives as part of
our periodic risk assessment.
Planned Completion Date: End of Q3 2021.
•	Lack of laboratory test cell and in-house testing capacity for
heavy-duty spark-ignition engines
Response: Heavy-duty spark-ignition (HDSI) engines represent
less than 4% of heavy-duty highway production. NVFEL is able
to test all the other sectors and can use contract laboratories or
portable emissions measurement systems to test HDSI engines if
necessary. Therefore, investment in HDSI testing capacity has not
been a priority to date.
Going forward, we will formally document and periodically
reassess decisions about investments in laboratory capacity as
part of a periodic risk assessment. Planned Completion Date: End
of Q3 2021.
Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering

Recommendation: Evaluate the following issues, which may
require regulatory or programmatic action, as part of (1) the on-
road heavy-duty vehicle and engine emission control program
risk assessment and (2) EPA's annual regulatory agenda
development process:
a.	Regulatory definition of on-road heavy-duty engine useful life
may not reflect actual useful life.
b.	Not-to-Exceed standard may not reflect real-world operating
conditions, especially for certain applications.
c.	In-use testing requirements for heavy-duty spark-ignition
engines may be needed.
847

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

d. A particle number standard may more accurately control
particulate matter emissions that impact human health.


Corrective Action: OAR agrees with this recommendation. We
will consider the first three issues as part of the CTI rulemaking
process. We also will commit to considering approaches to best
control particulate matter emissions that affect public health and
will continue to work toward improving ultrafine particulate
matter measurement techniques. Planned: 9/30/22, Status:
Adhering

19-P00207-140
Recommendation: Develop and implement electronic checks in
EPA's Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System or
through an alternative mechanism to retroactively evaluate
emissions and quality assurance data in instances where
monitoring plan changes are submitted after the emissions and
quality assurance data have already been accepted by EPA.
6/27/19

Corrective Action: The Office of Air and Radiation agrees with
this recommendation. As OIG acknowledged in its report, CAMD
has already addressed this issue by implementing a post-
submission data check that is run at the end of each reporting
period. The new check identifies any monitoring plan
submissions containing changes to monitoring span records that
occur prior to the current emissions reporting period. If any
changes were made, the check recalculates quality assurance tests
that were submitted prior to the span change and verifies the
pass/fail status of each test. If the status of any test changes,
CAMD analysts will contact the affected facility and request the
correction and resubmission of the impacted data. As of February
2019, CAMD had insured that the discrepancies in the data used
in OIG's review were resolved and resubmitted.


In the long term, CAMD will implement an additional check in
the ECMPS forcing retroactive span record changes to require the
reevaluation and resubmission of any affected quality assurance
tests and hourly emissions records. CAMD has initiated the
process of re-engineering ECMPS. In order to minimize
additional expenditures on the current version of ECMPS, CAMD
will focus on adding the check to the new version of ECMPS.
Planned: 9/30/22, Status: Adhering

19-P00251-140
Recommendation: Assess the training needs of the EPA regions
and state, local and tribal agencies concerning stack test plans and
report reviews and EPA test methods, and develop and publish a
plan to address any training shortfalls.
7/30/19

Corrective Action: OAR will implement the following corrective
action. OAR's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

848

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

(OAQPS) will work with the EPA regions and state, local and
tribal air agencies to review currently available materials and
assess training needs with respect to approval of stack test plans,
review of stack test reports, and conduct of EPA test methods,
with respect to particulate matter compliance testing. OAQPS
will work with EPA regional, state, local and tribal agencies to
identify current training shortfalls and develop a plan to address
these shortfalls. We anticipate two and one-half years to assess
the training needs, prepare a training plan, and begin enacting the
plan. Planned: 3/31/22, Status: Adhering

Recommendation: Develop stack test report checklists for EPA
Method 5 and other frequently used EPA methods to assist state,
local and tribal agencies in their reviews of stack test plans and
reports.
Corrective Action: OAR will implement the following corrective
action. OAQPS will work with the EPA regions, state, local and
tribal air agencies to develop checklists useful for review of stack
test plans, and stack test reports for EPA Method 1, Method 2,
Method 3, Method 4, Method 5, Method 7E, and Method 10.
OAQPS will provide this content as informational and not to be
used as official Regulatory Guidance. We anticipate that it will
take approximately 18 months for these checklists to be finalized.
Planned: 6/30/21, Status: Adhering
17-P00053-164
Recommendation: Conduct an assessment of clearance devices to
validate their effectiveness in detecting required clearance levels,
as part of the Office of Pesticide Programs' ongoing re-evaluation
of structural fumigants.
12/12/16
Corrective Action: Within two years of the final report, by
November 30, 2018, OCSPP will validate and implement new
device clearance guidance. Planned: 11/30/18, Status: Delayed
17-P00395-164
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan to reduce
excess Pesticides Reregi strati on and Expedited Processing Fund
and Pesticide Registration Fund balances within the established
target range.
9/18/17
Corrective Action: Assess progress in achieving 2020 spend
down projections, as described in 11/13/17 memo from OCSPP to
OIG entitled "Response to Final Report: EPA Needs to Manage
Pesticide Funds More Efficiently," Report No. 17-P-0395.
Planned: 12/31/21, Status: Adhering
18-P00080-164
Recommendation 1: The Assistant Administrator for Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention, in coordination with the Office
of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance: 1. Develop and
implement a methodology to evaluate the impact of the revised
2/15/18
849

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

Agricultural Worker Protection Standard on pesticide exposure
incidents among target populations.

Corrective Action 1-1: CA 1 — OCSPP will: (1) collect and
review data related to the extent to which agricultural workers
obtain knowledge through trainings; (2) collect and review
incident data; and (3) after reviewing training and incident data,
analyze the need to collect additional information to help evaluate
the impact of the revised Worker Protection Standard. These
efforts, as well as a detailed timeline for completion of specific
milestones, are described in the Agency's 2/25/19 Response to
the OIG"s Final Report. After reviewing training and incident
data, OCSPP will consider the need to collect additional
information to help evaluate the impact of the revised Worker
Protection Standard. EPA will examine the potential for
additional sources of information that might contribute to a better
understanding of the rule's impact by December 2022. Target
Completion Date: OCSPP will complete a Final Report on the
three efforts described below by December 31, 2022. Planned:
12/31/22, Status: Adhering
19-P00195-164
Recommendation: Complete the actions and milestones identified
in the Office of Pesticide Programs' PRIA Maintenance Fee Risk
Assessment document and associated plan regarding the fee
payment and refund posting processes.
6/21/19
Corrective Action: OCSPP/OPP will complete the actions and
milestones identified in the Office of Pesticide Programs' PRIA
Maintenance Fee Risk Assessment document and associated plan
regarding the fee payment and refund posting processes by
12/31/2020. Planned: 12/31/20, Status: Delayed
19-P00275-164
Recommendation: Determine how EPA can use the Managed
Pollinator Protection Plan survey results to advance its National
Program Manager Guidance goals and its regulatory mission.
8/15/19
Corrective Action: OCSPP accepts the recommendation to utilize
the AAPCO/SFIREG survey results to advance the Program's
National Program Management Goals (NPMG1). OCSPP will use
the information provided from the AAPCO/SFIREG survey to
revise applicable NPMGs at the next available opportunity in the
cycle of NPMG planning. OCSPP projects this task will be
completed in June 2021. Planned: 6/30/21, Status: Adhering
18-P00240-166
Recommendation: Build capacity for managing the use of citizen
science, and expand awareness of citizen science resources, by:
a. Finalizing the checklist on administrative and legal factors for
agency staff to consider when developing citizen science projects,
as well as identifying and developing any procedures needed to
ensure compliance with steps in the checklist;
9/5/18
850

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

b.	Conducting training and/or marketing on EPA's citizen science
intranet site for program and regional staff in developing projects;
and
c.	Finalizing and distributing materials highlighting project
successes and how EPA has used results of its investment in
citizen science.

Corrective Action: ORD will consult with OGC and other
relevant EPA programs and regions to finalize the checklist on
administrative and legal factors for agency staff to consider when
developing citizen science projects. ORD will conduct training
and marketing for program and regional staff. Finally, ORD will
have an active communication and outreach strategy that will
include communications materials highlighting project successes
and how EPA has used results of its investment in citizen science.
Planned: 12/31/20, Status: Delayed
13-P00178-167
Recommendation: Develop and implement an inspection
monitoring and oversight program to better manage and assess
the quality of program inspections, reports, supervisory oversight,
and compliance with inspection guidance.
3/21/13
Corrective Action: OSWER and OECA are working with the
Regions to identify key components of a repository of inspection
reports in order to better ensure and assess the quality of RMP
inspections. This repository system will be developed by the end
of FY2014.
May 2018 Update: The OLEM Acting AA approved the revision
of this milestone date from February 28, 2020 to June 30, 2023.
The new date is based on the completion date of RMP
Reconsideration rule. OLEM will need at least 3 years after its
completion to start the development of an on-line system for the
Regions to file/submit each of their inspection reports. This
system must allow for quality control and the ability to not only
assess the quality of the inspection reports but identify trends and
issues at RMP facilities in order to better target our inspection
efforts. Following completion of the final regulation, EPA will be
required to revise the RMP on-line reporting system and over a
dozen guidance documents to incorporate the regulatory changes.
This action will take approximately one year to complete
following the completion of the guidance in corrective action 1-1
above. Therefore, this action item should be delayed until after
the completion of that work. (The OLEM Acting AA notified the
OIG via email dated May 15, 2018.)
For recommendation #2: July 2017 Update: The OLEM Acting
AA approved the revision of this milestone date from September
851

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

30, 2019 to February 2020. This action requires the development
of an on-line system for the Regions to file/submit each of their
inspection reports. This system must allow for quality control and
the ability to not only assess the quality of the inspection reports
but identify trends and issues at RMP facilities in order to better
target our inspection efforts. Recently, EPA published a final rule
extending the effective date on the January 2017 revised RMP
rule to February 2019. For the next 20 months, EPA will be
engaged in drafting and publishing a proposed and final rule.
Following completion of the final regulation, EPA will be
required to revise the RMP on-line reporting system and over a
dozen guidance documents to incorporate the regulatory changes.
This action will take approximately one year to complete
following the completion of the guidance in corrective action 1-1
above. Therefore, this action item should be delayed until after
the completion of that work. (The OLEM Acting AA notified the
OIG AIG, Carolyn Copper, via email on 07/07/2017.)
March 2016 Update: The OLEM AA approved to revise the
corrective action milestone date from March 30, 2017, to
September 30, 2019. This action requires the development on an
on-line system for the Regions to file/submit each of their
inspection reports. This system must allow for quality control and
the ability to not only assess the quality of the inspection reports
but identify trends and issues at RMP facilities in order to better
target our inspection efforts. Currently the Administration's
priority is to complete a final RMP regulation by late 2016/early
2017. Following completion of the final regulation, EPA will be
required to revise the RMP on-line reporting system and over a
dozen guidance documents to incorporate the regulatory changes.
This effort will take 2-3 years and must be completed in that
timeframe to give facilities time to review the guidance and
comply with the new requirements under the RMP Program.
Therefore, this OIG action item must be delayed until after the
completion of that work. This action will take approximately one
year to complete following the completion of the guidance in
corrective action 1-1 above. (The OIG was notified via an email
from the OLEM AA to Art Elkins on 03/11/2016.)
July 2014 Update: The OSWER A A approved to revise the
corrective action date from 09/30/14 to 03/31/17. This corrective
action has been overtaken by actions and deadlines associated
with implementation of Executive Order 13650, Improving
Chemical Facility Safety and Security, which lays out a

852

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

comprehensive set of actions to advance chemical facility safety
and security, including federal coordination on inspections. We
anticipate the repository will take 18 months to 2 years to
complete once we start. (The OIG was notified of this delay via
an email from the OSWER AA to the Inspector General dated
07/30/14). Planned: 9/30/14, Status: Delayed

18-P00059-167
Recommendation: Develop and include procedures for checking
with other regions for facilities/sites with multiple self-insured
liabilities in the standard operating procedures created for
Recommendation 5.
12/22/17
Corrective Action: 6. In the RCRA Program, EPA will inventory
and assess existing guidance and/or SOPs, outline OLEM and
OECA roles and responsibilities for overseeing the validity of
RCRA financial assurance instruments, communicate existing
guidance and/or SOPs to financial assurance community, and
develop or update SOPs and provide to financial assurance
community. The RCRA Program will develop and include
procedures for checking with other regions or states when
facilities/sites with multiple self-insured liabilities exist.
May 2019 Update: The OLEM Acting AA approved the revision
of this milestone date from June 20, 2020 to September 30, 2021
as a result of the delay in launching the RCRAInfo Financial
Assurance module upgrade to version 6. New expected date
delivery is 09/30/21. Acting OLEM AA, Barry Breen, notified
Acting IG Charles Sheehan on Tuesday, May 7, 2019. Planned:
6/30/20, Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Develop standard operating procedures that
outline the Office of Land and Emergency Management and
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance roles and
responsibilities for overseeing the validity of Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act and Superfund financial
assurance instruments.
Corrective Action: 5. EPA will, for the RCRA Program,
inventory and assess existing guidance and/or SOPs, outline
OLEM and OECA roles and responsibilities for overseeing the
validity of RCRA financial assurance instruments, communicate
existing guidance and/or SOPs to financial assurance community,
and develop or update SOPs and provide to financial assurance
community.
May 2019 Update: The OLEM Acting AA approved the revision
of this milestone date from June 20, 2020 to September 30, 2021
as a result of the delay in launching the RCRAInfo Financial
853

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

Assurance module upgrade to version 6. New expected date
delivery is 09/30/21. Acting OLEM AA, Barry Breen, notified
Acting IG Charles Sheehan on Tuesday, May 7, 2019. Planned:
6/30/20, Status: Delayed

Recommendation: Develop and include instructions on the steps
to take when an invalid financial assurance instrument (expired,
insufficient in dollar amount, or not provided) is identified in the
standard operating procedures created for Recommendation 5 and
collect information on the causes of invalid financial assurance.
Corrective Action: 7. In the RCRA Program, EPA will inventory
and assess existing guidance and/or SOPs, outline OLEM and
OECA roles and responsibilities for overseeing the validity of
RCRA financial assurance instruments, communicate existing
guidance and/or SOPs to financial assurance community, and
develop or update SOPs and provide to financial assurance
community.
The RCRA Program will develop and include in the guidance
and/or SOPs: (1) instructions on the steps to take when an invalid
financial assurance instrument (expired, insufficient in dollar
amount, or not provided) is identified and (2) where and when to
collect and document causes of invalid financial assurance.
May 2019 Update: For corrective actions 5, 6 and 7, the OLEM
Acting AA approved the revision of this milestone date from June
20, 2020 to September 30, 2021 as a result of the delay in
launching the RCRAInfo Financial Assurance module upgrade to
version 6. New expected date delivery is 09/30/21. Acting OLEM
AA, Barry Breen, notified Acting IG Charles Sheehan on
Tuesday, May 7, 2019.
Planned: 6/30/20, Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Train staff on the procedures and instructions
developed for Recommendations 5 through 7.
Corrective Action: 8. In the RCRA Program, EPA will hold
webinar for the EPA regions and states, add SOPs to existing
training materials, and evaluate financial assurance training needs
and develop training plan for recommendations 5 through 7.
May 2019 Update: the OLEM Acting AA approved the revision
of this milestone date from September 30, 2020 to December 31,
2021 as a result of the delay in launching the RCRAInfo
Financial Assurance module upgrade to version 6. New expected
date delivery is 12/31/21. Acting OLEM AA, Barry Breen,
854

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

notified Acting IG Charles Sheehan on Tuesday, May 7, 2019.
Planned: 9/30/20, Status: Delayed

20-P00066-167
Recommendation: Maintain one official agencywide management
and tracking system for homeland security and emergency
response equipment that provides for the status, availability and
acquisition costs of all equipment.
1/30/20

Corrective Action: Establish AAMS as the agencywide system
for tracking personal property. Planned: (5/30/22, Status:
Adhering

10-P00224-168
Recommendation: Develop a systematic approach to identify
which States have outdated or inconsistent MO As, renegotiate
and update those MO As using the MOA template, and secure the
active involvement and final, documented concurrence of
Headquarters to ensure national consistency.
9/14/10

Corrective Action: EPA has completed the review of all EPA-
State MO As. Ten authorized NPDES states were identified as
being problematic. The EPA Regions and States have completed
actions to update MO As to satisfy concerns identified in the
corrective action plan for three states: Iowa, Missouri, and
Virginia. At this time, seven MO As are still in the process of
being corrected.


OECA is requesting a six month extension to continue to work
with the Office of Water and States on their MO As to fulfill this
corrective action. Planned: 3/28/18, Status: Delayed

19-P00002-168
Recommendation: Issue updated and consistent guidance on
biosolids fecal coliform sampling practices.
11/15/18

Corrective Action: OW completed its work to address the
corrective action on 12-16.20. The corrective actions will be
published in an ORD document that is currently under review.
The document will not meet the deadline for posting to the
website by 12/30/2020. OST anticipates the updates will be
publicly available by 5/31/2021.
Planned: 12/31/20, Status: Delayed


Recommendation: Publish guidance on the methods for the
biosolids pathogen alternatives 3 and 4.


Corrective Action: OW completed its work to address the
corrective action on 12-16.20. The corrective actions will be
published in an ORD document that is currently under review.
The document will not meet the deadline for posting to the
website by 12/30/2020. OST anticipates the updates will be
publicly available by 5/31/2021.
Planned: 12/31/20, Status: Delayed

855

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan to obtain the
additional data needed to complete risk assessments and finalize
safety determinations on the 352 identified pollutants in biosolids
and promulgate regulations as needed.

Corrective Action: For Recommendation 4, EPA agreed with this
recommendation. The initial corrective action did not fully
address the intent of the recommendation. After our meeting on
September 17, 2018, EPA provided acceptable corrective actions
and a planned completion date. In addition to EPA's work on
improving the biennial review process, the Office of Water
established a performance measure for biennial reviews. This
recommendation is resolved with corrective actions pending.
Planned: 12/31/22, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: Complete development of the probabilistic risk
assessment tool and screening tool for biosolids land application
scenarios.
Corrective Action: For Recommendation 3, the Agency agreed
with the recommendation and offered an acceptable corrective
action but did not provide a specific completion date. After our
meeting on September 17, 2018, the Office of Water provided an
acceptable completion date. This recommendation is resolved
with corrective actions pending.
Planned: 12/31/21, Status: Adhering
19-P00318-168
Recommendation: Update and revise the 2010 Public Notification
Handbooks to include:
a.	Public notice delivery methods that are consistent with
regulations.
b.	Information on modern methods for delivery of public notice.
c.	Public notice requirements for the latest drinking water
regulations.
d.	Procedures for public water systems to achieve compliance
after violating a public notice regulation.
e.	Up-to-date references to compliance assistance tools.
f.	Additional resources for providing public notice in languages
other than English.
9/25/19
Corrective Action: EPA will revise the Public Notification
Handbook per OJG's. Planned: 9/30/20, Status: Delayed
Recommendation: Update and revise the 2010 Revised State
Implementation Guidance for the Public Notification Rule to
include:
a.	Public notice delivery methods that are consistent with
regulations.
b.	Information on modern methods for delivery of public notice.
856

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

Corrective Action: EPA will revise the State Implementation
Guidance per OIG's recommendation.
Planned: 9/30/20, Status: Delayed

18-P00059-180
Recommendation: Update standard operating procedures and data
systems to accommodate the changes implemented for
Recommendation 2.
12/22/17
Corrective Action: OLEM, w/support from OECA, will update
SOPs and data systems to accommodate the implemented risk
management actions. Planned: 9/30/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: Train staff on the changes implemented for
Recommendation 2.
Corrective Action: OLEM, w/support from OECA, will train staff
on the implemented risk management actions.
Planned: 12/31/21, Status: Adhering
19-P00251-180
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan for improving
the consistency of stack test reviews across the EPA regions and
delegated agencies.
7/30/19
Corrective Action: OECA will implement a plan, in coordination
with OAR and consistent with the activities undertaken by OAR
in addressing recommendations 2-3, for improving the
consistency of stack test reviews across the EPA regions and
delegated agencies. Such enhanced compliance monitoring will
help ensure the tool of stack testing is being sufficiently and
properly utilized.
Planned: 3/31/22, Status: Adhering
19-P-00302-180
Recommendation: Establish the Lead-Based Paint Renovation,
Repair and Painting Rule Program's objectives, goals and
measurable outcomes, such as measures to demonstrate the
effectiveness of program contributions toward decreasing
elevated blood lead levels.
9/9/19
Corrective Action: OECA, in collaboration with the EPA
Regions, will evaluate the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair
and Painting Rule compliance monitoring and enforcement
program to determine appropriate refinements to existing
program objectives to help OECA set enforcement goals and
measurable outcomes for FY21, consistent with the OECA
National Program Guidance.
Planned: 7/1/21, Status: Adhering
Recommendation: Identify the regulated universe of Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule firms in support of
regional targeting strategies, in coordination with the Office of
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.
Corrective Action: OECA, in coordination with OCSPP, will
develop a targeting strategy that will include a geospatial-based
857

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
Uccomnicmliitions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc
model to assist the Regions in identifying areas of concern for
lead exposure in general along with any guidance on how to
identify firms within this area.
Planned: 12/31/21, Status: Adhering	
19-P00318-180
Recommendation: Conduct a national review of the adequacy of
primacy agency implementation, compliance monitoring,
reporting and
enforcement of the Safe Drinking Water Act's public notice
requirements.	
Corrective Action: Over the past two years, OECA has been
working with the Regions and the Office of Water to refine the
scope, the mechanism and the roll out for a drinking water
enforcement review (DW ER). Such a review examines whether
a primacy agency is taking appropriate and timely actions to
address violations; is properly escalating enforcement and is
ensuring a facility's return to compliance. OECA is working
closely with our Regional offices to ensure that this review
complements existing oversight efforts and, in particular, does
not duplicate OW programmatic reviews.
OECA is building this nationally consistent framework from
activities and reviews that select Regions are already
implementing. In particular, OECA has been working with
Regions 4, 5 and 7, who are currently doing these types of
reviews with their states and sharing their experience and lessons
learned to help us build this national framework. Additional time
in 2021 will allow these Regions the chance to perform additional
enforcement reviews and allow OECA to coordinate and parallel
its construction of a national framework as these reviews are
undertaken.
Once the pilot is completed, OECA will work across all its
Regions and in partnership with the states to institutionalize this
element of enforcement program oversight.
OECA will pilot test a new framework for regional review of
primacy agency response to violations, including whether public
notice requirements are met. Upon completion of the pilot,
OECA will review the results and, if the approach is effective,
will finalize the framework and implement a national program for
periodic regional reviews for primacy agencies. OECA will pilot
test a new framework for regional review of primacy agency
response to violations, including whether public notice
requirements are met. Upon completion of the pilot, OECA will
9/25/19
858

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UcconiiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

review the results and, if the approach is effective, will finalize
the framework and implement a national program for periodic
regional reviews for primacy agencies.
Planned: 12/31/20, Status: Delayed

20-P00012-180
Recommendation: Require circuit riders to include the pesticide
needs and risks of each tribe on their circuit in the development
of their
priority-setting plans, which are a required component of tribal
pesticide enforcement cooperative agreements.
10/29/19

Corrective Action: OECA agrees to develop guidance which will
require circuit riders to include the needs and risks of each tribe
on their circuit in the development of priority-setting plans, which
are required component of tribal pesticide enforcement
cooperative agreements.
(FINAL GUIDANCE). Planned: 12/31/22, Status: Adhering


Recommendation: Develop and implement tribal circuit rider
guidance for pesticide inspectors that includes expectation-setting
and
communication with tribes that are being served under a tribal
pesticide enforcement cooperative agreement.




Corrective Action: OECA agrees to develop guidance which will
require circuit riders to include the needs and risks of each tribe
on their circuit in the development of priority-setting plans, which
are required component of tribal pesticide enforcement
cooperative agreements. (FINAL GUIDANCE). Planned:
12/31/22, Status: Adhering


Recommendation: Develop and implement regional processes to
receive feedback directly from tribes using pesticide circuit
riders.


Corrective Action: OECA agrees to develop guidance which will
require circuit riders to include the needs and risks of each tribe
on their circuit in the development of priority-setting plans, which
are required component of tribal pesticide enforcement
cooperative agreements.
(FINAL GUIDANCE). Planned: 12/31/22, Status: Adhering

14-P00109-360
Recommendation: Direct COs to require that the contractor adjust
all its billings to reflect the application of the correct rate to team
subcontract ODCs.
2/4/14

Corrective Action: Region 6 concurs with Recommendation No.
3 and agrees to require the contractor to adjust all of its past
billings to reflect the application of the composite rate to team-
subcontractor ODCs that were arranged for and paid for by the
team-subcontractor. We intend to implement the corrective action
when final indirect cost rates (OCR) are established. Therefore,

859

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

the CO will be directed to defer past billing adjustments until the
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audits the indirect cost
rates and the EPA Financial Administrative Contracting Officer
(FACO) negotiates, approves and issues a Final Indirect Cost
(ICR) Agreement for the past billing periods (i.e. Years 2007 to
2013). Planned: 9/30/24, Status: Adhering

18-P00233-360
Recommendation: We recommend that the EPA Regional
Administrators, Regions 6 and 9: Fully develop and implement
prioritization and resource allocation methodologies for the
Tronox abandoned uranium mine sites on or near Navajo Nation
lands.
8/22/18

Corrective Action: Complete development and implementation of
resource allocation methodology following the cost analysis of
the preferred remedies. Complete prioritization list for funding by
December 31, 2021. Establish a funding allocation strategy for
the prioritized NAUM sites by December 31, 2021. Complete
final resource allocations by May 31, 2022. Planned: 12/31/21,
Status: Adhering

12-100560-380
Recommendation: Ensure the grantee addresses the
recommendations and recover questioned and unsupported costs.
9/24/07

Corrective Action: 3/20/15: OGD and the Region are discussing
contents of proposed Final Determination Letter and need for a
waiver request. Projected completion date is June 30, 2015.


12/30/13: The Region is continuing to work with HQ and
regional counsel on options for this recipient with a revised
expected completion date of June 30,2014. The Region also will
be looking to the new OMB Circular on cooperative audit
resolution for some guidance.


10/21/13: OGD and the Region are discussing contents of
proposed Final Determination Letter. Projected completion date
is December 30, 2013. Status: Delayed

18-P00233-390
Recommendation: We recommend that the EPA Regional
Administrators, Regions 6 and 9: Complete the necessary
removal site evaluations and engineering evaluations/cost
analyses.
8/22/18

Corrective Action: Complete engineering evaluations/cost
analyses. Region 6: COMPLETED 4 Draft Final EECAs for 18
Tronox NAUMs.
Region 9: Draft 4 EE/CAs by September 30, 2021 at mines that
are closest to residents, where exposure is higher, and human
health risk is therefore potentially higher. Draft remaining

860

-------
I V Audit
Nil in her
UccomiiH'mliilions sind Corrective Actions
Report
Dsitc

EE/CAs by December 31, 2021. Planned: 12/31/20, Status:
Delayed

Recommendation: We recommend that the EPA Regional
Administrators, Regions 6 and 9: Fully develop and implement
prioritization and resource allocation methodologies for the
Tronox abandoned uranium mine sites on or near Navajo Nation
lands.
Corrective Action: Complete development and implementation of
resource allocation methodology following the cost analysis of
the preferred remedies. Complete prioritization list for funding by
December 31, 2021. Establish a funding allocation strategy for
the prioritized NAUM sites by December 31, 2021. Complete
final resource allocations by May 31, 2022. Planned: 12/31/21,
Status: Adhering
20-P-00063-451
Recommendation: Evaluate and determine whether the
improperly credited Travel Compensatory Time Off should have
been forfeited as required by EPA's Pay Administration Manual
and, if so, whether the time off or value of any time off used
should be recovered.
12/19/19
Corrective Action: OMS will review the travel compensatory
time off cases and issue a determination on the findings. If
recovery is warranted, OMS will notify the Office of Air and
Radiation and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer so the
process may be initiated.
Planned: 1/31/21, Status: Delayed
20-P-00120-451
Recommendation: Develop and maintain an up-to-date inventory
of the software and associated licenses used within the
organization.
3/25/20
Corrective Action: Establishing License Entitlement Inventory.
The Agency is developing and deploying an enterprise Software
Asset and Configuration Management (SACM) capability that
will align license entitlement data with software inventories to
fully realize the goal of this recommendation. Planned: 10/15/21,
Status: Adhering
861

-------
EPA GAO Open Recommendations and Recommendations Closed as Unimplemented
Uepoli
N il in her
Ueporl
Issue
Dale
Recommendation Text
Status Comments
GAO-UO-
148
2UU0-
01-04
The Administrator, EPA, should
take a number of steps to further
protect the American public from
elevated lead levels in drinking
water. Specifically, to improve
EPA's ability to oversee
implementation of the lead rule
and assess compliance and
enforcement activities, EPA
should ensure that data on water
systems' test results, corrective
action milestones, and violations
are current, accurate, and
complete. (1)
In recent years, EPA has taken the
significant steps to protect the American
public from elevated lead levels in drinking
water. Examples of the Agency's actions
include: Proposed regulations, updates to
the Lead and Copper Rule, MOU's with
federal partners to reduce lead in schools
and childcare facilities, funding for states
to test drinking water in schools, reviews
and quality control evaluations of state data
and files to improve accuracy of reporting,
and modernization of EPA's Safe Drinking
Water Information System (SDWIS)
database.
GAO-08-
440
2008-
03-07
To develop timely chemical risk
information that EPA needs to
effectively conduct its mission, the
Administrator, EPA, should
require the Office of Research and
Development to re-evaluate its
draft proposed changes to the IRIS
assessment process in light of the
issues raised in this report and
ensure that any revised process
periodically assesses the level of
resources that should be dedicated
to this significant program to meet
user needs and maintain a viable
IRIS database. (5)
EPA leadership is working to initiate the
new cycle of strategic planning. With
respect to proposed changes to the IRIS
assessment process, the IRIS Program is
revising the nomination process for FY22
to address issues identified by GAO. To
date, the previous September 2020 request
for FY21 nominations was re-administered
in March 2021 using a modified process
that better engages the Regions and other
offices in EPA that do not oversee statutory
decision making, i.e., Office of Children's
Health Protection. Using the nomination
process to understand the Agency's
assessment needs is the starting point for
making informed decisions on resources.
862

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-11-
381
2011-
06-17
To improve EPA's ability to
oversee the states' implementation
of the Safe Drinking Water Act
and provide Congress and the
public with more complete and
accurate information on
compliance, the Administrator of
EPA should resume data
verification audits to routinely
evaluate the quality of selected
drinking water data on health-
based and monitoring violations
that the states provide to EPA.
These audits also should evaluate
the quality of data on the
enforcement actions that states and
other primacy agencies have taken
to correct violations. (1)
On September 30, 2020, OW submitted
additional supporting documentation to
promote closure of the open
recommendations and hosted a follow up
technical meeting on November 16, 2020.
GAO-11-
381
2011-
06-17
To improve EPA's ability to
oversee the states' implementation
of the Safe Drinking Water Act
and provide Congress and the
public with more complete and
accurate information on
compliance, the Administrator of
EPA should work with the states
to establish a goal, or goals, for the
completeness and accuracy of data
on monitoring violations. In
setting these goals, EPA may want
to consider whether certain types
of monitoring violations merit
specific targets. For example, the
Agency may decide that a goal for
the states to completely and
accurately report when required
monitoring was not done should
differ from a goal for reporting
when monitoring was done but not
reported on time. (2)
On September 30, 2020, OW submitted
additional supporting documentation to
promote closure of the open
recommendations and hosted a follow up
technical meeting on November 16, 2020.
863

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-12-
42
2011-
12-09
To better ensure the credibility of
IRIS assessments by enhancing
their timeliness and certainty, the
EPA Administrator should require
the Office of Research and
Development, should different
time frames be necessary, to
establish a written policy that
clearly describes the applicability
of the time frames for each type of
IRIS assessment and ensures that
the time frames are realistic and
provide greater predictability to
stakeholders. (2)
As part of adjustments to the nomination
process, the IRIS Program is soliciting
information on context for the assessment
and timelines under which the assessment
is needed. These inputs will be considered
as part of ORD's analysis of which
nominations the IRIS Program can
realistically commit to. Other key inputs
are the anticipated complexity of the
assessment and resourcing (i.e., contract
support and/or availability of staff with the
appropriate expertise). Nominations that
are formally accepted by ORD are then
communicated publicly in the IRIS
Program Outlook, with time frame
estimates for public engagement. EPA is
evaluating how complexities in IRIS
assessments are communicated.
GAO-12-
42
2011-
12-09
To ensure that current and accurate
information on chemicals that
EPA plans to assess through IRIS
is available to IRIS users-
including stakeholders such as
EPA program and regional offices,
other federal agencies, and the
public—the EPA Administrator
should direct the Office of
Research and Development to
annually publish the IRIS agenda
in the Federal Register each fiscal
year. (4)
IRIS Integrated Assessment Plans (IAPs)
and Systematic Review Protocols
(Protocols) document chemical-specific
considerations which inform the timelines
presented in the IRIS Program Outlook.
GAO-12-
791
2012-
09-26
To enhance federal agencies'
ability to realize enterprise
architecture benefits, the
Secretaries of the Departments of
Agriculture, the Air Force, the
Army, Commerce, Defense,
Education, Energy, Homeland
Security, the Interior, Labor, the
Navy, State, Transportation, the
Treasury, and Veterans Affairs;
the Attorney General; the
Administrators of the
EPA has been rebuilding its Enterprise
Architecture program. In FY20, the
architecture program brought on senior
expertise in network and security
architecture, and has addressed needed
stand-alone architecture tasks (e.g.,
initiating a baseline security architecture).
The Architecture Program also has started
building recurring programmatic elements
(e.g., supporting deployment of
DevSecOps capabilities) against which
programmatic metrics can be
864

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


Environmental Protection Agency,
General Services Administration,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and Small
Business Administration; the
Commissioners of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and
Social Security Administration;
and the Directors of the National
Science Foundation and the Office
of Personnel Management should
fully establish an approach for
measuring enterprise architecture
outcomes, including a documented
method (i.e., steps to be followed)
and metrics that are measurable,
meaningful, repeatable, consistent,
actionable, and aligned with the
Agency's enterprise architecture's
strategic goals and intended
purpose. (18)
applied. During FY21, as those
programmatic elements mature, EPA will
revisit the Gartner guidance referenced
earlier and identify at least one metric for
the architecture program.
GAO-12-
791
2012-
09-26
To enhance federal agencies'
ability to realize enterprise
architecture benefits, the
Secretaries of the Departments of
Agriculture, the Air Force, the
Army, Commerce, Defense,
Education, Energy, Homeland
Security, the Interior, Labor, the
Navy, State, Transportation, the
Treasury, and Veterans Affairs;
the Attorney General; the
Administrators of the
Environmental Protection Agency,
General Services Administration,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and Small
Business Administration; the
Commissioners of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and
Social Security Administration;
and the Directors of the National
Science Foundation and the Office
EPA has been rebuilding its Enterprise
Architecture program. In FY20, the
architecture program brought on senior
expertise in network and security
architecture, and has addressed needed
stand-alone architecture tasks (e.g.,
initiating a baseline security architecture).
The Architecture Program also has started
building recurring programmatic elements
(e.g., supporting deployment of
DevSecOps capabilities) against which
programmatic metrics can be
applied. During FY21, as those
programmatic elements mature, we will
revisit the Gartner guidance referenced
earlier and identify at least one metric for
the architecture program.
865

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


of Personnel Management should
periodically measure and report
enterprise architecture outcomes
and benefits to top agency officials
(i.e., executives with authority to
commit resources or make changes
to the Program) and to OMB. (42)

GAO-13-
145
2013-
08-08
To improve EPA's management of
the conditional registration
process, the Administrator of EPA
should direct the Director of the
Office of Pesticide Programs to
complete plans to automate data
related to conditional registrations
to more readily track the status of
these registrations and related
registrant and agency actions and
identify potential problems
requiring management attention.
(1)
EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs is
providing status information on conditional
registrations issued from 2000 through
2020 on the web at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-
regi strati on/conditi onal -pesti ci de-
registration. IT modernization efforts
enabling the Office of Pesticide Programs
to track conditionally registered products
electronically are targeted for completion
in 2021.
GAO-13-
249
2013-
03-22
To better position EPA to collect
chemical toxicity and exposure-
related data and ensure chemical
safety under existing TSCA
authority, while balancing its
workload, and to better position
EPA to ensure chemical safety
under existing TSCA authority, the
Administrator of EPA should
direct the appropriate offices to
develop strategies for addressing
challenges that impede the
Agency's ability to meet its goal of
ensuring chemical safety. At a
minimum, the strategies should
address challenges associated
with: (1) obtaining toxicity and
exposure data needed to conduct
ongoing and future TSCA Work
Plan risk assessments, (2) gaining
access to toxicity and exposure
data provided to the European
Chemicals Agency, (3) working
OPPT completed its workforce analysis in
December 2020. Over the past several
years EPA has significantly increased its
human capital resources to address the
increased workload imposed by the
amended TSCA. EPA requested that GAO
close this pre-Lautenberg Act Report and
declare all recommendations closed as
implemented.
866

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


with processors and processor
associations to obtain exposure-
related data, (4) banning or
limiting the use of chemicals under
section 6 of TSCA and planned
actions for overcoming these
challenges—including a description
of other actions the Agency plans
to pursue in lieu of banning or
limiting the use of chemicals, and
(5) identifying the resources
needed to conduct risk
assessments and implement risk
management decisions in order to
meet its goal of ensuring chemical
safety. (3)

GAO-13-
369
2013-
05-10
To ensure that EPA maximizes its
limited resources and addresses
the statutory, regulatory, and
programmatic needs of EPA
program offices and regions when
IRIS toxicity assessments are not
available, and once demand for the
IRIS Program is determined, the
EPA Administrator should direct
the Deputy Administrator, in
coordination with EPA's Science
Advisor, to develop an
agencywide strategy to address the
unmet needs of EPA program
offices and regions that includes,
at a minimum: (1) coordination
across EPA offices and with other
federal research agencies to help
identify and fill data gaps that
preclude the Agency from
conducting IRIS toxicity
assessments, and (2) guidance that
describes alternative sources of
toxicity information and when it
would be appropriate to use them
when IRIS values are not
IRIS program officials are building
capacity for applying systematic review in
chemical assessments. They are
communicating more frequently with EPA
program and regional offices about
program and regional office needs and the
IRIS program's ability to meet those needs.
IRIS officials will convene coordination
meetings twice a year with relevant EPA
program offices to discuss chemical
assessments to meet agency needs.
867

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


available, applicable, or current.
(3)

GAO-14-
274
2014-
05-19
To strengthen federal oversight of
facilities with ammonium nitrate,
the Secretary of Labor and the
Administrator of EPA should
direct OSHA and EPA,
respectively, to consider revising
their related regulations to cover
ammonium nitrate and jointly
develop a plan to require high risk
facilities with ammonium nitrate
to assess the risks and implement
safeguards to prevent accidents
involving this chemical. (6)
In January 2017, EPA issued a final rule to
modify its Risk Management Program
(RMP) regulations. The Agency did not to
propose any revisions to the list of
regulated substances and does not plan to
add ammonium nitrate to the RPM
regulated program.
GAO-14-
413
2014-
05-22
To ensure the effective
management of software licenses,
the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should develop an agency-wide
comprehensive policy for the
management of software licenses
that addresses the weaknesses we
identified. (87)
GAO informed EPA that they are in the
process of closing this recommendation.
GAO-14-
413
2014-
05-22
To ensure the effective
management of software licenses,
the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should employ a centralized
software license management
approach that is coordinated and
integrated with key personnel for
the majority of agency software
license spending and/or enterprise-
wide licenses. (88)
In 2020, EPA developed an automated
process to track software license
deployment that is monitored through a
centralized dashboard. The Agency is
working towards central tracking and
maintenance for Agency software records.
Once established, the policy for
procurement and management of that
software will soon follow.
GAO-14-
65
2013-
11-06
To improve the Agency's
implementation of PortfolioStat,
the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should direct the CIO to develop a
complete commodity IT baseline.
(19)
In December 2020, EPA provided the latest
2020 READ business function inventory.
EPA believes the recommendation is
implemented and requested closure.
868

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-14-
65
2013-
11-06
To improve the Agency's
implementation of PortfolioStat, in
future reporting to OMB, the
Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should direct the CIO to fully
describe the following
PortfolioStat action plan elements:
(1)	consolidate commodity IT
spending under the Agency CIO;
(2)	establish targets for commodity
IT spending reductions and
deadlines for meeting those
targets; and (3) establish criteria
for identifying wasteful, low-
value, or duplicative investments.
(20)
In December 2020, EPA provided
documentary evidence supporting full
implementation and requested closure.
GAO-14-
65
2013-
11-06
To improve the Agency's
implementation of PortfolioStat,
the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should direct the CIO to report on
the Agency's progress in
consolidating the managed print
services and strategic sourcing of
end user computing to shared
services as part of the OMB
integrated data collection quarterly
reporting until completed. (21)
Documentation of the print contract
supporting this effort was provided in
December 2020 with a request for closure.
GAO-15-
617
2015-
09-15
To improve the Agency's IT
savings reinvestment plans, the
Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should direct the CIO to ensure
that the Agency's integrated data
collection submission to OMB
includes, for all reported
initiatives, complete plans to
reinvest any resulting cost savings
and avoidances from OMB-
directed IT reform-related efforts.
(19)
This is a long-standing project requiring
substantial coordination as EPA reviews
and defines "reinvest" which could have
significant implications on IT budget
reporting requirements.
869

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-15-
618
2015-
08-17
The EPA Administrator should
direct OGD to develop a timetable
with milestones and identify and
allocate resources for adopting
electronic records management for
all 10 regional offices. (2)
Based on an April 2021 meeting with EPA
and GAO, auditors are in the process of
closing this recommendation.
GAO-15-
618
2015-
08-17
The EPA Administrator should
direct OGD to implement plans for
adopting an up-to-date and
comprehensive IT system by 2017
that will provide accurate and
timely data on agencywide
compliance with grants
management directives. (3)
Based on an April 2021 meeting with EPA
and GAO, auditors are reviewing EPA's
request for closure.
GAO-16-
220
2016-
02-10
To better ensure that EPA is
reducing the risk of unreasonable
harm to important pollinators, the
Administrator of EPA should
direct the Office of Pesticide
Programs to develop a plan for
obtaining data from pesticide
registrants on the effects of
pesticides on nonhoney bee
species, including other managed
or wild, native bees. (4)
Closed - Not Implemented
EPA's plan for obtaining data on the
effects of pesticides on nonhoney bees is to
adhere to the existing process that the
Agency follows for other taxonomic
groups. More specifically, EPA routinely
uses surrogate species to evaluate risks
from pesticides and has used honey bees as
a surrogate for nonhoney bee species.
Ideally, risk evaluations would be made
using as many species as would likely be
exposed. However, doing so would be
impractical on a routine basis. EPA
maintains that existing data indicate that
honey bees continue to represent a
reasonable surrogate for nonhoney bee
species.
GAO-16-
220
2016-
02-10
To help comply with the directive
in the White House Pollinator
Health Task Force's strategy, the
Administrator of EPA should
direct the Office of Pesticide
Programs to identify the pesticide
tank mixtures that farmers and
pesticide applicators most
commonly use on agricultural
crops to help determine whether
those mixtures pose greater risks
Closed - Not implemented
EPA conducted a pilot study to evaluate
pesticide tank mixes used on almonds in
California during bloom. Although the
Agency was able to identify pesticide tank
mixes applied during almond bloom, the
number and variability in those
combinations EPA concluded that is it not
feasible to do so at a national level given
the number of factors that influence such
870

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


than the sum of the risks posed by
the individual pesticides. (5)
combinations even within a relatively
localized area.
GAO-16-
323
2016-
03-03
The Secretaries of the
Departments of Agriculture,
Commerce, Defense, Education,
Energy, Health and Human
Services, Homeland Security,
Housing and Urban Development,
the Interior, Labor, State,
Transportation, the Treasury, and
Veterans Affairs; the Attorney
General of the United States; the
Administrators of the
Environmental Protection Agency,
General Services Administration,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and U.S. Agency
for International Development; the
Director of the Office of Personnel
Management; the Chairman of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission;
and the Commissioner of the
Social Security Administration
should take action to improve
progress in the data center
optimization areas that we
reported as not meeting OMB's
established targets, including
addressing any identified
challenges. (27)
Closed - Not Implemented
EPA initially agreed with this
recommendation. However, in August
2016, the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) announced changes to the
optimization metrics that analyzed in
GAO's report. In June 2019, OMB issued
new data center optimization guidance that
removed the remaining two optimization
metrics for agencies. As a result of OMB's
changes, EPA decided not to implement
this recommendation.
871

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-16-
530
2016-
07-14
The EPA Administrator should
direct the Office of Grants and
Debarment (OGD) and program
and regional offices, as
appropriate, as part of EPA's
ongoing streamlining initiatives
and the development of a grantee
portal, to incorporate expanded
search capability features, such as
keyword searches, into its
proposed web-based portal for
collecting and accessing
performance reports to improve
their accessibility. (1)
Implementation of this recommendation is
ongoing. In December 2020, EPA
completed its migration to a new,
comprehensive web-based IT application
Next Generation Grants System (NGGS),
which replaced the legacy grants
management system. In addition, EPA
launched an electronic grants file
management system in March 2021, which
will improve grants managers' access to
performance information.
GAO-16-
530
2016-
07-14
The EPA Administrator should
direct OGD and program and
regional offices, as appropriate, as
part of EPA's ongoing
streamlining initiatives and the
development of a grantee portal,
once EPA's new performance
system is in place, to ensure that
the Office of Water adopts
software tools, as appropriate, to
electronically transfer relevant
data on program results from
program-specific databases to
EPA's national performance
system. (3)
Implementation of this recommendation is
ongoing. Following its adoption of a new
IT system for budget performance data in
December 2017, EPA began developing
the capability for program offices to import
data from their program-specific databases
electronically, via a machine-readable
template.
GAO-16-
530
2016-
07-14
The EPA Administrator should
direct OGD and program and
regional offices, as appropriate, as
part of EPA's ongoing
streamlining initiatives and the
development of a grantee portal, to
clarify the factors project officers
should consider when determining
whether performance reports are
consistent with EPA's
environmental results directive. (4)
Implementation of this recommendation is
ongoing. Specifically, EPA is in the
process of revising guidance to clarify the
factors project officers should consider
when determining whether performance
reports are consistent with EPA's
environmental results directive.
872

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-16-
530
2016-
07-14
The EPA Administrator should
direct OGD and program and
regional offices, as appropriate, as
part of EPA's ongoing
streamlining initiatives and the
development of a grantee portal, to
expand aspects of EPA's policy for
certain categorical grants,
specifically, the call for an explicit
reference to the planned results in
grantees' work plans and their
projected time frames for
completion, to all grants. (5)
Implementation of this recommendation is
ongoing. In December 2020, EPA
completed migration to a new,
comprehensive web-based IT application
Next Generation Grants System (NGGS),
which replaced the legacy grants
management system. EPA plans to assess
and evaluate a web-based portal for
collecting performance information from
grantees as a post-deployment
enhancement to the system, by the end of
December 2021, and any solution
developed will cover all grantees.
GAO-16-
530
2016-
07-14
The EPA Administrator should
direct OGD and program and
regional offices, as appropriate, as
part of EPA's ongoing
streamlining initiatives and the
development of a grantee portal, to
incorporate built-in data quality
controls for performance reports
into the planned web-based portal
based on EPA's environmental
results directive. (6)
Implementation of this recommendation is
ongoing. In December 2020, EPA
completed its migration to a new,
comprehensive web-based IT application
Next Generation Grants System (NGGS),
which replaced the legacy grants
management system. EPA will assess and
evaluate a web-based portal for collecting
performance information from grantees as
a post-deployment enhancement to the
system, by December 31, 2021. Data
quality standards—including those for
submitting performance reports—will be
established as part of the assessment of
enhancements to NGGS.
GAO-16-
79
2015-
11-19
To better monitor and provide a
basis for improving the
effectiveness of cybersecurity risk
mitigation activities, informed by
the sectors' updated plans and in
collaboration with sector
stakeholders, the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection
Agency should direct responsible
officials to develop performance
metrics to provide data and
determine how to overcome
challenges to monitoring the water
and wastewater systems sector's
cybersecurity progress. (7)
EPA continues to carry out its sector-
specific agency role and consult with the
Water Sector Coordinating Council
(WSCC), Department of Homeland
Security, and National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), as
appropriate, to promote cybersecurity and
understand the use of the cybersecurity
framework across the water sector
consistent with statutory requirements. In
December 2020 EPA provided final
documentation and requested closure.
873

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-17-
424
2017-
09-01
The Assistant Administrator for
Water of EPAs Office of Water
should require states to report
available information about lead
pipes to EPA's Safe Drinking
Water Information System
(SDWIS)/Fed (or a future redesign
such as SDWIS Prime) database,
in its upcoming revision of the
LCR. (1)
EPA has initiated work to develop
guidance for States and Water systems that
will share best practices for preparing and
updating Lead Service Line inventories.
EPA promulgated requirements for states
to report lead service line information to
EPA under 40 CFR 142.15(c)(4)(iii)(D) in
the LCRR published on January 15,2021.
GAO-17-
424
2017-
09-01
The Assistant Administrator for
Water of EPA's Office of Water
should require states to report all
90th percentile sample results for
small water systems to EPA's
SDWIS/Fed (or a future redesign
such as SDWIS Prime) database,
in its upcoming revision of the
LCR. (2)
EPA promulgated a requirement for states
to report the 90th percentile sample results
for each water system regardless of size to
EPA under 40 CFR 142.15(c)(4)(iii)(A) as
part of the LCRR published on January 15,
2021. Reporting to EPA will be done
through the SDWIS database. EPA is
currently developing a SDWIS-State
module for state to use to oversee LCRR
implementation.
GAO-17-
424
2017-
09-01
The Assistant Administrator for
Water of EPA's Office of Water
and the Assistant Administrator of
EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
develop a statistical analysis that
incorporates multiple factors-
including those currently in
SDWIS/Fed and others such as the
presence of lead pipes and the use
of corrosion control—to identify
water systems that might pose a
higher likelihood for violating the
LCR once complete violations
data are obtained, such as through
SDWIS Prime. (3)
EPA is currently working with state
representatives to develop the modernized
SDWIS. EPA works closely with state
primacy agencies to gather reliable
violations data. EPA also tracks Action
Level Exceedances. Both violation and
ALE data are provided to EPA's regional
program and enforcement staff on a
quarterly basis for review and discussion
with states, and for decisions on needed
technical assistance or enforcement
actions. The use of the internal tool has
benefited EPA's priority efforts to assist
systems with lead contamination.
874

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-17-
448
2017-
08-15
The Secretaries of Agriculture,
Commerce, Defense, Homeland
Security, Energy, HHS, Interior,
Labor, State, Transportation,
Treasury, and VA; the Attorney
General of the United States; the
Administrators of EPA, GSA, and
SB A; the Director of OPM; and
the Chairman of NRC should take
action to, within existing OMB
reporting mechanisms, complete
plans describing how the Agency
will achieve OMB's requirement to
implement automated monitoring
tools at all agency-owned data
centers by the end of fiscal year
2018. (15)
EPA uses ScienceLogic's EM7 monitoring
tool for measuring server utilization. EPA
expects to expand use of the tool to DCOI-
DC-45634 (NEIC) once the facility is
completed (expected Q4 2021). Work is
underway to close the data center footprint
in DCOI-DC-45621 (PYD) which is
expected to complete by Q4 2021.
GAO-18-
102
2018-
01-26
The Assistant Administrator for
Water should direct EPA's Office
of Water to amend its Safe
Drinking Water Act and Clean
Water Act inspection guidance
documents to add questions on
strategic workforce planning
topics—such as the number of
positions needed in the future,
skills needed in the future, and any
potential gaps in water operator
positions. (1)
In December 2020, EPA requested closure
of this recommendation. EPA's Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
(OECA) developed the Clean Water Act
inspection guidance documents highlighted
in the recommendation.
GAO-18-
148
2017-
11-07
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) should ensure that the CIO
of EPA establishes an agency-
wide policy and process for the
CIO's certification of major IT
investments' adequate use of
incremental development, in
accordance with OMB's guidance
on the implementation of
FITARA, and confirm that it
includes: a description of the CIO's
role in the certification process; a
description of how CIO
EPA's Office of Mission Support,
Environmental Information, Office of
Customer Advocacy, Policy and Portfolio
Management (PMD) acknowledges GAOs
recommendations and commits to
continuing to establish and execute the
necessary steps to complete as well as
implement agency-wide policy, procedures
and processes for the CIO certification of
major IT investments; and will ensure its
major IT investments always demonstrate
adequate use of incremental development
and conform to OMB FITARA guidance.
875

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


certification will be documented;
and a definition of incremental
development and time frames for
delivering functionality, consistent
with OMB guidance. (11)

GAO-18-
211
2018-
02-15
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should take steps to consult with
respective sector partner(s), such
as the SCC, DHS and NIST, as
appropriate, to develop methods
for determining the level and type
of framework adoption by entities
across their respective sector. (4)
EPA conducted training, webcasts, and
outreach related to cybersecurity, including
using the framework and tailoring its
efforts to sector needs. EPA used the NIST
framework to inform development of its
cyber resources. EPA has been consulting
with Federal partners to develop potential
options for promoting and assessing
adoption of the framework.
GAO-18-
309
2018-
05-15
The Administrator of EPA, in
cooperation with other members of
the tribal infrastructure task force,
should review the 2011 task force
report and identify and implement
additional actions to help increase
the task force's collaboration at the
national level. (8)
EPA's Office of Water submitted
responses to GAO questions and
documentation supporting implementation
in November and December 2020 with a
request for closure.
GAO-18-
410
2018-
07-12
The Director, working with the
Study, should ensure that as the
Study finalizes its reporting
format, it fully incorporates
leading practices of performance
reporting. (1)
The Study is still on track to complete an
online reporting and tracking system by
mid-year 2021. Once the online tracking
system is in place, EPA will consider this
recommendation to be fully implemented.
GAO-18-
410
2018-
07-12
The Director, working with the
Study, should estimate the range
of potential costs for all
implementation actions and
include the estimates in future
supplements to the 2015 plan. (3)
The Study finalized the 2020-2024
implementation action update in October
2020 and is currently finalizing the
technical supporting documents that
accompany each of the implementation
actions.
GAO-18-
453
2018-
07-19
The EPA Region 10 Administrator
should work with the management
conference on future updates to the
CCMP to help prioritize among
the indicators that currently lack
measurable targets and ensure that
such targets are developed for the
highest priority indicators where
possible. (1)
EPA continues to work with the leader of
the management conference, the Puget
Sound Partnership, on the effort to review
and revise the Puget Sound recovery vital
signs, including updating associated
indicators and targets. Progress on this
effort was presented at the May 2020
Ecosystem Coordination Board meeting.
The effort is on schedule to be completed
876

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils



for the 2022 Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan (CCMP) update.
GAO-18-
561
2018-
08-24
The Administrator of the EPA
should develop a program
management plan that includes a
schedule of the actions EPA will
take and the resources and funding
it needs to establish and implement
the Columbia River Basin
Restoration Program, including
formation of the associated
Columbia River Basin Restoration
Working Group, and submit this
plan to the appropriate
congressional authorizing
committees as part of the fiscal
year 2020 budget process. (1)
Closed - Not Implemented
EPA developed a program management
plan for the implementation of the new
CWA 320 authority and provided GAO
with an updated program plan for FY21
and FY22 with program objectives,
actions, and timelines for both the Working
Group and grant program. In addition, the
CRBRP successfully launched the first
grant competition awarding $2M in 14
grants (13 in R10 and 1 in R8) in
September 2020 and held two formal
Working Group meetings (virtually due to
COVID) with over 100 attendees.
Although it was not included in the FY20
budget process, EPA considers the intent of
this recommendation to be met.
GAO-18-
93
2018-
08-02
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should ensure that the Agency's IT
management policies address the
role of the CIO for key
responsibilities in the six areas we
identified. (19)
EPA's OCAPPM is working on the
Agency's IT management policies to
address to role of the CIO for key
responsibilities in the six areas that GAO
identified. OCAPPM will provide an
update on this initiative in mid- FY 21.
GAO-19-
22
2019-
03-20
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should develop a documented
policy or clarify existing policy to
implement the statutory
requirement to consult with ANCs
on the same basis as Indian tribes
under Executive Order 13175. (2)
This recommendation is in progress and
has not been fully implemented. Due to the
COVID pandemic, tribal consultation was
extended an additional three months to
allow for more input. It is estimated that
the project will be completed in 2021.
GAO-19-
280
2019-
07-08
The EPA Administrator should
direct EPA officials responsible
for appointing advisory committee
members to follow a key step in its
appointment process—developing
and including draft membership
grids in appointment packets with
staff rationales for proposed
EPA continues to disagree with this
recommendation. It is up to the EPA
Administrator to develop policy for the
Agency and as such, it is within the
Administrator's authority to develop and/or
alter policies to fit particular
circumstances. In the cases cited by the
GAO, the Administrator substituted the
877

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


membership— for all committees.
(1)
creation of a membership grid with a series
of briefings that enabled an in-depth
discussion of the strengths and weaknesses
of each potential candidate. EPA requested
closure of this recommendation.
GAO-19-
280
2019-
07-08
EPA's Designated Agency Ethics
Official should direct EPA's
Ethics Office, as part of its
periodic review of EPA's ethics
program, to evaluate—for
example, through audits or spot-
checks—the quality of financial
disclosure reviews for special
government employees appointed
to EPA advisory committees. (2)
At the time of the GAO audit, EPA's
Ethics Office was understaffed. These
staffing issues have been resolved and, as a
result, EPA is now engaged in a full and
thorough review of all employees'
(including special government employees
engaged to work on EPA federal advisory
committees) ethics forms to ensure that
they meet all ethics requirements. EPA is
on track to launch an electronic financial
disclosure reporting system for special
government employees in 2021.
GAO-19-
384
2019-
07-25
The Administrator of EPA should
update the Agency's policies to
require an organization-wide
cybersecurity risk assessment. (39)
EPA updated policies and provided them to
GAO in 2020. The Agency awaits closure
of the recommendation.
GAO-19-
384
2019-
07-25
The Administrator of EPA should
establish a process for conducting
an organization-wide
cybersecurity risk assessment. (40)
EPA is collaborating internally with the
Office of Customer Advocacy, Policy &
Portfolio Management OCAPPM to have
all relevant policies and procedures
reviewed on a timely basis. OCAPPM has
established an agency-wide process for
reviewing, modifying, and re-issuing (after
signatories) all policies and procedures.
NIST published the latest revision of
Special Publication 800-53, Revision 5 in
September 2020. EPA is in the process of
reviewing, modifying, and re-issuing all
security policies/procedures per the
OCAPPM review process.
GAO-19-
384
2019-
07-25
The Administrator of EPA should
fully establish and document a
process for coordination between
cybersecurity risk management
and enterprise risk management
functions. (41)
EPA updated policies and provided them to
GAO in 2020. The Agency awaits closure
of the recommendation.
878

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-19-
391
2019-
06-21
The Administrator of EPA should
work with the Commissioner of
FDA and Secretary of Agriculture
to incorporate leading
collaboration practices as they
implement their interagency FLW
reduction strategic plan, to include
(1) agreeing on roles and
responsibilities; (2) developing
mechanisms to monitor, evaluate,
and report on results; (3)clearly
defining short- and long-term
outcomes; (4) identifying how
leadership commitment will be
sustained; and (5) ensuring that the
relevant stakeholders have been
included in the collaborative
effort. (1)
EPA considers the recommendation parts
1, 2, 4 and 5 fully implemented. Parts 3
will continue with interagency
coordination and engagement through
2021.
GAO-19-
543
2019-
09-16
The Administrator of EPA, as
chair of the working group, should
develop guidance for agencies on
what they should include in their
environmental justice strategic
plans. (21)
EPA, as lead for the Environmental Justice
Interagency Working Group (EJ IWG)
continues to lead the coordination, along
with the member agencies, the
implementation of GAO's
recommendations. EPA agreed with this
recommendation and will work through the
EJ IWG to review the Agency's actions and
update this information.
GAO-19-
543
2019-
09-16
The Administrator of EPA, as
chair of the working group, should
develop guidance or create a
committee of the working group to
develop guidance on methods the
agencies could use to assess
progress toward their
environmental justice goals. (22)
EPA, as lead for the Environmental Justice
Interagency Working Group (EJ IWG)
continues to lead the coordination, along
with the member agencies, the
implementation of GAO's
recommendations. EPA agreed with this
recommendation and will work through the
EJ IWG to review the Agency's actions and
update this information.
GAO-19-
543
2019-
09-16
The Administrator of EPA, as
chair of the working group, and in
consultation with the working
group, should clearly establish, in
its organizational documents,
strategic goals for the federal
EPA, as lead for the Environmental Justice
Interagency Working Group (EJ IWG)
continues to lead the coordination, along
with the member agencies, the
implementation of GAO's
recommendations. EPA agreed with this
recommendation and will work through the
879

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


government's efforts to carry out
the 1994 Executive Order. (23)
EJ IWG to review the Agency's actions and
update this information.
GAO-19-
543
2019-
09-16
The Administrator of EPA, as
chair of the working group, and in
consultation with the other
working group members, should
update the 2011 Memorandum of
Understanding and renew the
agencies' commitments to
participate in the interagency
collaborative effort and the
working group. (24)
EPA, as lead for the Environmental Justice
Interagency Working Group (EJ IWG)
continues to lead the coordination, along
with the member agencies, the
implementation of GAO's
recommendations. EPA agreed with this
recommendation and will work through the
EJ IWG to review the Agency's actions and
update this information.
GAO-20-
126
2019-
12-12
The Administrator of EPA should
update security plan for the
selected operational system to
identify a description of security
controls, and the individual
reviewing and approving the plan
and date of approval. (19)
EPA's Chief Information Security Officer
will coordinate with agency Information
Security Officers to ensure system security
plans include all required information. The
CISO will monitor all systems for
compliance through the established Chief
Information Officer Authorization to
Operate process.
GAO-20-
126
2019-
12-12
The Administrator of EPA should
update the security assessment
report for the selected operational
system to identify the summarized
results of control effectiveness
tests. (20)
EPA does not concur with this
recommendation.
GAO-20-
126
2019-
12-12
The Administrator of EPA should
update the list of corrective actions
for the selected operational system
to identify the specific weakness,
estimated funding and anticipated
source of funding, key remediation
milestones with completion dates,
changes to milestones and
completion dates, and source of
the weaknesses. (21)
EPA does not concur with this
recommendation.
GAO-20-
126
2019-
12-12
The Administrator of EPA should
prepare the letter authorizing the
use of cloud service for the
selected operational system and
submit the letter to the FedRAMP
program management office. (22)
EPA's Chief Information Security Officer
will coordinate with agency Information
Security Officers to ensure corrective
actions have plans of actions and
milestones as appropriate that include all
required information. The CISO will
monitor all systems for compliance through
880

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils



the established Chief Information Officer
Authorization to Operate process.
GAO-20-
126
2019-
12-12
The Administrator of EPA should
develop guidance requiring that
cloud service authorization letter
be provided to the FedRAMP
program management office. (23)
EPA disagrees with this recommendation.
The Agency submits authorization
documents to the FedRAMP Program
management office (PMO). EPA will
continue to follow, as appropriate,
FedRAMP PMO guidance promulgated
through the General Services
Administration FedRAMP Website. EPA
initiated outreach to the FedRAMP PMO
to obtain additional information on
reporting requirements. No additional
guidance stipulating the need to report
specific services authorized or updated
templates to illustrate reporting specific
services authorized has been provided.
GAO-20-
129
2019-
10-30
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should ensure that the Agency
fully implements each of the eight
key IT workforce planning
activities it did not fully
implement. (11)
EPA is working on key IT workforce
planning activities as outlined in EPA's
response to GAO's Final Report. EPA
provided additional information and
supporting documentation to GAO in
December 2020 with a request for closure.
GAO-20-
24
2020-
01-16
The Director of Water Security of
EPA, as Chair of the Water Sector
Government Coordinating
Council, should work with the
council to identify existing
technical assistance providers and
engage these providers in a
network to help drinking water and
wastewater utilities incorporate
climate resilience into their
projects and planning on an
ongoing basis. (1)
EPA continues to work across the water
sector and with its established network to
provide technical assistance, knowledge,
financing, and other tools to ensure
investments made in water infrastructure
are sustainable and resilient in the long
term. EPA works within an existing
network of technical assistance providers
and coordinates with its stakeholders to
identify opportunities to provide technical
assistance to wastewater and drinking
water utilities, as resources are available.
GAO-20-
299
2020-
02-25
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should take steps to consult with
respective sector partner(s), such
as the SCC, DHS, and NIST, as
appropriate, to collect and report
sector-wide improvements from
In October and December 2020, EPA's
Office of Water provided additional
supporting documentation to request
closure of this recommendation.
881

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


use of the framework across its
critical infrastructure sector using
existing initiatives. (5)

GAO-20-
597
2020-
09-28
The Assistant Administrator of the
Office of Water should develop an
agreement with HHS's Offices of
Child Care and Head Start on their
roles and responsibilities in
implementing the Memorandum of
Understanding on Reducing Lead
Levels in Drinking Water in
Schools and Child Care Facilities.
For example, these agreements
may include the ways in which
guidance and information will be
shared with states and Head Start
grantees, such as through webinars
or email, and how frequently. (3)
EPA disagrees with the need for this
recommendation because the action
requested is already being implemented in
coordination with HHS and 13 other
federal and non-federal partners committed
to the reduction of lead levels in drinking
water in schools
GAO-20-
597
2020-
09-28
The Assistant Administrator of the
Office of Water should direct the
Office of Water to specify how it
will track progress toward the
outcomes of the Memorandum of
Understanding on Reducing Lead
Levels in Drinking Water in
Schools and Child Care Facilities
and determine how it will
regularly monitor and update the
MOU. For example, the Office of
Water could develop performance
measures for each of the MOU's
outcomes. In addition, the Office
of Water could submit annual
reports on progress toward
achieving the MOU's outcomes or
it could plan to update the
agreement at specific intervals. (4)
EPA disagrees with the need for this
recommendation because the action
requested is already being implemented
under the 2019 MOU and the WIIN Act
grant programs.
GAO-20-
73
2019-
10-18
The Director of the Office of
Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation should
establish a schedule for
standardizing and improving
EPA convened a working group
comprising Superfund and regional
officials to collect and disseminate
geospatial information for all NPL sites to
help the Agency analyze, communicate,
882

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils


information on the boundaries of
nonfederal NPL sites. (1)
and respond to the impacts of natural
disasters and weather.
GAO-20-
73
2019-
10-18
The Administrator of EPA should
clarify how EPA's actions to
manage risks to human health and
the environment from the potential
impacts of climate change effects
at nonfederal NPL sites align with
the Agency's current goals and
objectives. (2)
EPA is reviewing its original response to
this recommendation and will provide
GAO with an update during the next
scheduled response.
GAO-20-
73
2019-
10-18
The Director of the Office of
Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation should
provide direction on how to
integrate information on the
potential impacts of climate
change effects into risk
assessments at nonfederal NPL
sites. (3)
EPA drafted a memo providing direction
on integrating information on the potential
impacts of climate change effects into risk
assessments at nonfederal NPL sites. The
Agency anticipated issuance in summer
2021.
GAO-20-
73
2019-
10-18
The Director of the Office of
Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation should
provide direction on how to
integrate information on the
potential impacts of climate
change effects into risk response
decisions at nonfederal NPL sites.
(4)
EPA drafted a memo providing direction
on integrating information on the potential
impacts of climate change effects into risk
assessments at nonfederal NPL sites. The
Agency anticipated issuance in summer
2021.
GAO-20-
81
2019-
11-21
The Environmental Protection
Agency Administrator should
evaluate training needs for agency
officials or others involved in
reviewing the merits of
researchers' data management
plans and, if additional training is
found to be warranted, develop
and provide such training. (20)
The Agency fully implemented this
recommendation and provided supporting
documentation and a request for closure on
5/5/2021.
883

-------
Ucpoli
N il in her
Ucporl
Issue
Dsilo
Uccoiniiu'ii(l:ilion Text
Sl:ilus Comniciils
GAO-20-
95
2020-
01-31
The Assistant Administrator for
EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
clearly document in guidance to
the regional offices how they
should use the definition of
informal enforcement actions to
collect data on these actions. (1)
EPA is in the process of amending the
September 2019 guidance to be consistent
with the Executive Order and expects to
finalize the amended guidance in spring
2021.
GAO-20-
95
2020-
01-31
The Assistant Administrator for
EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
clearly document in guidance to
the regional offices that they
should collect data on compliance
assistance activities and specify
which mechanism to use to
maintain the data, such as ICIS.
(2)
As part of the NPDES SNC NCI strategy,
guidance was provided to the regions about
collecting compliance assistance data.
OECA-HQ is collecting and maintaining
the data the regions reported on their NCI
templates.
EPA requested closure of this
recommendation.
GAO-20-
95
2020-
01-31
The Assistant Administrator for
EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
include the known limitations of
data in its annual reports and
provide information on the
intended use of EPA's data. (3)
The list of known data limitations will be
included for the FY20 Annual Results.
EPA requested closure of this
recommendation.
884

-------
On-Site Inspections and Off-site Compliance Monitoring Compliance Activities from
EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System16
The table below provides the numbers in EPA's Integrated Compliance Information (ICIS) data
system for on-site inspection and off-site compliance monitoring activities from fiscal years (FY)
2016-2020. We have a few critical caveats (listed below the chart) that should be kept in mind
when reviewing or using these numbers.
Fiscal Year
On-Site Inspections
Off-Site Compliance
Total
(FY)

Monitoring Activities
{EPA has not set separate
targets for this category of
activities)
Completed
FY 2016 actual
9,300
4,500
13,800
FY 2017 actual
8,800
3,100
11,900
FY 2018 actual
7,900
2,900
10,800
FY 2019* actual
Target: 7,400
Actual: 8,100
2,200
10,329
FY 2020 actual
Target: not set**
Actual: 3,600
4,900
8,500

FY 2021
Target: not set**

10,000
projection
Actual: TBD


FY 2022
Target: not set**

10,000
projection
Actual: TBD


*2019 was the first year that EPA specifically set targets for on-site inspections only. Previous targets were for
combination of on-site inspections and off-site compliance monitoring activities.
**Targets were not set for on-site inspections in FY 2020 and FY 2021 due to travel restrictions and uncertainty
resulting from COV1D-19.
Caveats:
1. Definitions: Nationally consistent definitions of on-site inspections and off-site compliance
monitoring activities did not exist for our compliance monitoring program until we issued
guidance on April 24, 2020. As a result, earlier data may include mis-categorized activities.
EPA's April 24, 2020 memorandum provided definitions for both on-site and off-site
compliance monitoring activities, which will create more consistency in each of the categories.
These improvements are effective for all of FY 2020 for on-site inspections and from April 1,
2020, forward for off-site compliance monitoring.
16 The Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 instructs EPA to follow guidance as set
forth in House Report 116-448. House Report 116-448 directs EPA to provide "separate targets for onsite inspections and offsite
compliance monitoring activities, and separate target and actuals data for onsite and offsite compliance monitoring activities for
the previous five fiscal years". Please see page 80: httpsV/www.congress.gov/l 16/crpt/hrpt448/CRPT-l 16hrpt448.pdf. This
report fulfills this requirement.
885

-------
2.	Incomplete Data Entry: Given that EPA has not historically required most types of off-site
compliance monitoring activities to be entered into an EPA database, these numbers are likely
incomplete. EPA's April 24, 2020, guidance for reporting key off-site compliance monitoring
activities establishes expectations for national reporting of these activities.
3.	COVID-19: Restrictions on travel during the pandemic affected EPA's ability to conduct on-
site inspections in FY 2020 and FY 2021. While on-site inspection numbers dropped
substantially during much of FY 2020, EPA was able to increase its off-site compliance
monitoring activities.
4.	States Conduct Majority of Inspections: Most inspections are performed by authorized states.
For example, states performed over 34,000 NPDES inspections - that is just one program.
5.	Data Mining: With modern tools, EPA mines data from monitoring reports and manifests. EPA
conducts off-site compliance monitoring to try to detect violations, including possible
violations of emission and discharge limitations. EPA uses this information to target facilities
for on-site inspections. The new April 2020 guidance will help EPA nationally focus and track
this important off-site compliance monitoring work.
6.	Totals More Reliable Than Subtotals: The sum of the two subtotals (on-site inspections +
offsite compliance monitoring activities) is a more reliable value because it smooths out some
of the variability in each subtotal. EPA believes that the April 2020 guidance finalizing
definitions of on-site inspections and off-site compliance monitoring activities will help make
the subtotal data more reliable going forward.
7.	Staffing Levels: The number of inspections EPA completes each year generally correlates with
our annual staffing levels. During the time period reported in the table, OECA's number of
full-time equivalents (FTEs) has decreased from 2,880 in FY 2016 to 2,423 in FY 2020.
886

-------
Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance (OECA) Travel Budget by Program Project FY 2016 - FY 20221

FY 2016
FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020"
FY 2021
FY 2022"'
Appropriation
Program Project
Enacted
Actuals4
Enacted
Actuals4
Enacted
4
Actuals
Enacted
Actuals4
Enacted
Actuals4
Enacted
PresBud
EPM

Brownfields
$16.0
$1.0
$16.0
$3,6
$16.0
$10.4
$16,0
$4.2
$16.0
$18.2
$16.0
$16.0

Civil Enforcement
$2,247,0
$2,221,5
$2,148.0
S1.SS2.4
$2 148.0
$1,860,9
$2,216,0
$1,942.2
$2.19" ,0
$SS6.2
$2 197,0
$2,19",0

Compliance Monitoring
$1,615,0
S 1.654 <
$1,524.0
$1 338,5
$1,524.0
$1,498.3
$1 <29.0
$1.397 2
$1 516,0
$694.8
$1 516,0
$1,516,0

Criminal Enforcement
$1 .*22 ft
$1,465.3
$1,522.0
$1,337.3
$1,522,0
$1,385."
$1,522,0
$1,458.1
$1,522.0
$748.4
$1,522,0
$1,522.0

Environmental Justice
$186 0
$175.2
$1S6.0
$200,3
$1S6,0
$103 ~
$0.0
$5,3
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0 0

Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
$20 0
$23.9
$20.0
$15,9
$20,0
$1~.0
$20.0
$24,0
$20,0
$6.9
$20,0
$20 U

NEPA Implementation4
$571.0
$340.4
$505.0
$251.6
$505,0
$251.1
$0.0
$70,5
SO.O
SO.O
SO.O
SO.O

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$238.0
$324.8
$238,0
$643.7
$238.0
$503.4
$238.0
$234.5
$238.0
$204.4
$238.0
$238.0

TOTAL EPM
$6,415,0
$6,206.9
$6,159.0
$5,6823
$6,159.0
$5,630,5
$5,541.0
$5,136.0
$5,509.®
$2,558.9
S5,5§9.§
$5,519.0
S&T

Forensies Support
$260.0
$256.5
$260,0
$144.8
$260.0
$157 J
$260.0
$193.1
$260.0
$115.0
$260.0
$260.0

TOTAL S&T
S260.0
SIS 6.5
$260.0
$144.8
S260.0
$157,8
$260,0
$193.1
$260.0
$115.0
S260.0
$141.0
LUST

CM Enforcement
$0.0
$0.1
$0,0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
SO.O
$0.0
SO.O
SO.O

TOTAL LUST
$0.0
S0.1
so.o
SO.O
SO.O
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
S0.0
$0.0
so.®
OIL

CM Enforcement
$14.0
$11.3
$14.0
$9.4
$14.0
$16.4
$14.0
$8.1
$14.0
$3,1
$14.0
$14.0

Compliance Monitoring
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
SO.O
$0.0
$0.0
SO.O

TOTAL OIL
$14.0
SI 1.3
SI 4.0
$9.4
S14.0
$16.4
$14.0
$8.1
$14.0
$3.1
$14.0
$14.0
SUPERFLND

Compliance Mentoring
$8.0
$0.0
$8.0
$0.0
$8.0
$11,0
$8.0
$0.0
$8,0
$0.0
$0.0
SO.O

Criminal Enforcement
*4 "2.0
$239 6
$468,0
3216.8
1468.0
$23".4
$468.0
$236."
$468,0
$125.8
$468.0
S46S.0

Fore11si.cs Support
$50.0
$41.2
$50.0
$36.4
$50.0
$25.5
$50.0
$32.9
$50,0
$1"2
$50,0
$50.0

Superfind: Enforcement
$1,221.0
$996.8
$1,135,0
q
$1,135,0
$798.7
$1.14*5,0
$995,"
$1,143.0
$445.0
$1,143.0
SI 1430

Superfiiid: Federal Facilities Enforcement
$140.0
$".3
$120,0
$t>8 3
$120,0
$69,0
$120,0
$65,1
$120.0
$81 7
$120,0
S 120,0

TOTAL SI PERFl ND
SI. 891.0
$1,354.9
SI.781.0
$1,226.4
$1,781.0
$1,130.6
Sl.^l.O
$1330.4
$1,789.0
$669.7
$1,781.0
Sl.^Sl.O
GRAND TOTAL
$8,580.0
57,829.7
S8.214.0
$7,062.9
$8,214.0
$6,935.3
$7,606.0
$6.6e>"7.6
$7,572.0
$3,346,7
$7,564.0
0
' The Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021 instincts EPA to provide 'requested enforcement travel bucket, and budgeted and actual
enforcement travel spending for the previous five fiscal years". Please see page 228: littps: govktfo goa coiSentpkg CREC-2020-12-2! pdfCREC-2020- !2-21 -hoiise-bk4.pdf
" Restrictions 011 travel dining the COMD-19 pandemic a fleeted EPA's ability to conduct on-site inspections.
J The FY 2022 enforcement travel budget lias been straight-lined torn die FY 2021 Enacted Level. His level can be adjusted when the Agency develops its FY 2022 Enacted Budget.
' Actuals include final obligations of New Obligation Authority (NO A) and Carryover for OECA.
Wlile XEPA Implementation is in the Enforcement Program Area, OECA transitioned this program project to EPA's Office of Administrator.
887

-------
FY 2022 Administrator's Priorities
Funding for the Administrator's priorities are allocated by program project in the FY 2022
President's Budget with a total of $2,375 million in the Environmental and Program Management
Account and $125 thousand in the Science and Technology Account.
These funds, which are set aside for the Administrator's priorities, are used to address unforeseen
issues that may arise during the year. These funds are used by the Administrator to support critical
unplanned issues and the amounts shown in the below table will be reallocated as needed, in
accordance with reprogramming limits.
FY 2022 President's Budget Funding for Administrator's Priorities
Appropriation
Program Project
Dollars in
Thousands
EPM
Acquisition Management
$150
EPM
Brownfields
$25
EPM
Civil Enforcement
$150
EPM
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
$75
EPM
Compliance Monitoring
$100
EPM
Criminal Enforcement
$145
EPM
Drinking Water Programs
$100
EPM
Exchange Network
$75
EPM
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
$100
EPM
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
$130
EPM
Human Resources Management
$25
EPM
International Sources of Pollution
$50
EPM
IT / Data Management
$175
EPM
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
$100
EPM
Legal Advice: Support Program
$75
EPM
NEPA Implementation
$100
EPM
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
$150
EPM
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
$150
EPM
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
$100
EPM
RCRA: Waste Management
$25
EPM
Science Advisory Board
$100
EPM
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
$100
EPM
Surface Water Protection
$50
EPM
TRI / Right to Know
$75
EPM
Tribal - Capacity Building
$50
S&T
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
$25
S&T
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
$50
S&T
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
$50
Total

$2,500
888

-------

Ff 2G22 CAngresskmal Justification Eitimted Resources tni FTE far laitwu
neutal Justice Progr

Dollar in Tlflitiiaals
AnmfAAn
PngramAetirities
=
iV 2€22 CJ
Isfimitetf FIT
EPM
HQ lariroonentri Justice(EJ) Frogtam Management «nd (kmtiaa&m*
5©.443i
:
EPM
EJSCREEX
»j»I
6.5
EPM
Environmental Justice Small Grants'
312,5241
5.5
EPM
Environmental Justice Collaborative Prcblera-Schini Cooperative Asreements*
118.4761
5.5
EPM
^"hite HousefiVE': EJ Inter-Agency Council (formerly EJ IWG1 Support aid EJ
coordination with Other Federal Agencies
%im.t
5.5
EPM
National EJ Advisory CcraciivVHEJ Advisory Council Support, and Climate EJ
Advisory Council

9,0
EPM
Environmental Justice Competitive Grant PK.sram"
5JC.CS.'
5.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Community Grant Pro-Ham
S25.C3C.I
2.0
EPM
Environmental Justice State Grant Profrara
52> VCG1:
\ "I "
EPM
Tntil Environmental Justice Grant Prceram6
S25.CCC.
J -
EPM
Conunutiitv-fcased Participatory 5.esearch Grant Program*

i.o
EPM
Environmental Justice Training Pre?™"
\ ¦* ^ ^
3.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Clearinghouse
^ WA A.
3.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Legal Support
i-
3.0
EPM
Agency Taints! Assistance, Research, Tatntni, Education and Communication
c r "'^Q,
5.5
EPM
Regional Outreach Centas

12.0
EPM
Regional Resources for Environmental Justice Program
\ J *t i s ^
65.1
Subtotal of HH EMimamuM Jmia? l#i§iii£#i tni FTE
S}93,6(2.
M.4
Superfimd
Superfend Environmental Justice Program Coordination
mm
5.5
Sktotel ef lapBfiiiiif lini-SBiiiiifcl Jv&ca'&Maitm, ui FTE
SSJWJ
IS
Total Ff 2121 CI EitfanM Khurs nl FH far Mtnnlil Justice hn
smmi
211.9
' Tie Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Apprapiiatiittis Act, 2021. instructs EPA to pomfe "aUmatkms for each
component of fundins for environmental justice progMns". Please see ptgf 221: te!ps://mw^Me40¥/™t'mf/pls.CIEC-2ffi§-12.-
2l/pdfCF£C-2tt2ft-12-2i-tottie-bk4,pfI£
'"The Accelerating Enwmnientil tod Economic Justice Initiative at EPA provides $936 million in Ff 2022 fowling for established programs
across the Agency that mill contribute to searing environmental justice. This breakout Mails the portion of this Initiative's fending specifically
TOflan the Agency's EJ Program. Further details about the Mints* on be found throughout EPA's Congressional Justification™
^Estimated ptojram activity resources include bath payroll md non-payroll resources.
* EPA retains flexibility.' to adjust the distribution ofreseuicn into ether program activities, is necessary.
* Resources for Small Grants and EJ Collaborative Problem-Solving Cooperative Agreements will Jfciy be omened teed upon applications the
A=?n:v receives iti FY 2-321. This is considered a base level.
The FY 2C22 Budget includes proposed authorization language to cany out $1# nation in new environmental justice grants aimed it reducing
the disproportions health impacts of amrsmnaiAd pollution and Sift adfios to establish at Environmental Justice framing Program charged
••nth increasing the capacity of residents c f undtrserved communities to identify sad address disproportionately adverse tomm health or
environmental effects.
889

-------
Index
A
Acquisition Management	xv, 119, 124, 321, 457, 460, 512, 514, 559, 561, 567, 812, 815, 816, 888
Acronyms for Statutory Authority	749
Administrative Law	 118,124,289, 290, 774, 812, 838
Administrative Provisions	715,794, 825
Alternative Dispute Resolution	 118,124, 292, 295,457, 460, 506, 812, 815
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act	797
American Rescue Plan	xv, 443, 797, 818
Analytical Methods	83,489, 756
Annual Performance Report	723,724, 780
Attorney Fee and Cost Payments	749
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations	433,435, 436, 437,457, 459, 465,466, 814
B
Beach / Fish Programs	119,125,408, 813
Brownfields .xi, 117, 121, 122, 162, 163, 164, 165, 206, 440, 531, 607, 613, 618, 619, 671, 672, 673, 737, 739, 758,
797, 800, 805, 811, 816, 838, 888
Brownfields Projects	165,607, 613, 619,671, 816
c
CASTNET	11, 12, 13, 128, 129, 130, 657
Categorical Grant
Beaches Protection	614, 817
Brownfields	614, 817
Environmental Information	614, 817
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance	614, 817
Lead	614, 817
Multipurpose Grants	607,614, 629, 817
Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)	614, 817
Pesticides Enforcement	614, 817
Pesticides Program Implementation	614, 817
Pollution Control (Sec. 106)	614, 817
Pollution Prevention	614, 817
Public Water System Supervision	614, 817
Radon	614,817
Toxics Substances Compliance	614, 817
Tribal Air Quality Management	614, 817
Tribal General Assistance Program	614, 817
Underground Injection Control	614, 817
Underground Storage Tanks	614, 817
Wetlands Program Development	614, 817
Categorical Grants..378, 379, 607, 614, 615, 616, 618, 620, 623, 626, 627, 629, 630, 633, 635, 638, 642, 645, 648,
650, 654, 656, 659, 661, 663, 665, 817
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance... 62,119,124, 229, 325, 334, 338, 450, 457, 460, 516, 518, 521, 523,
527, 559, 561, 568, 812, 815, 818
Chesapeake Bay	xii, 188,189,190
Children/Other Sensitive Populations
Agency Coordination	118,123, 240, 812
Civil Enforcement..x, 38, 117, 122, 173, 174, 176, 178, 559, 561, 564, 587, 589, 597, 598, 781, 811, 815, 816, 837,
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance	888
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs	 5, 7,11,12,14,117,122,127,128,129,130,131, 809, 810
Clean Air and Climate	 7,11,15,17, 20,122,127,133,143,147,155,160, 809, 810, 818
890

-------
Climate Protection Program	15,133
Commission for Environmental Cooperation	270, 274,752, 111
Communities, vii, xii, 6, 89, 92, 93, 140, 175, 180, 197, 198, 250, 295, 314, 322, 333, 371, 383, 392, 458, 477, 513,
522, 529, 536, 549, 559, 581, 587, 602, 620, 627, 691, 699, 710, 773, 787, 800
Compliance	ix, 15, 61, 69, 117, 122, 166, 167, 168, 170, 175, 177, 256, 263, 294, 297, 298, 309, 331, 398, 412,
438, 440, 457, 459, 467, 472, 473, 475, 520, 551, 564, 576, 577, 587, 589, 590, 591, 592, 607, 633, 640, 654,
663, 731, 746, 749, 750, 759, 767, 769, 781,784, 793, 800, 807, 811, 814, 816, 837, 846, 885, 887, 888
Compliance Monitoring	ix, 117, 122, 167, 168, 412, 457, 459, 473, 587, 589, 591, 633, 640, 654, 749, 781, 811,
814,816, 885, 888
Computational Toxicology	9, 99, 810, 839
Congressional Priorities	6, 9,113,114,119,125, 430, 431, 614, 810, 813, 817
Congressionally Mandated Projects	614, 817
Coronavirus	xv, 321, 326, 512,797
COVID.... ..xv, 11, 13, 14, 23, 49, 60, 64, 152, 181, 237, 238, 272, 285, 286, 301, 306, 309, 318, 321, 330, 336, 346,
347, 348, 353, 440, 442, 443, 468, 502, 503, 512, 519, 525, 594, 712, 730, 780, 781, 782, 788, 877, 885, 886
Covid-19	574, 577, 579
Criminal Enforcement	38, 117, 122, 177, 178, 457, 459, 475, 479, 597, 768, 811, 814, 837, 888
D
Decontamination	45
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program	607, 613,668, 816
Drinking Water Infrastructure Resilience and Sustainability	608, 613,697, 817
Drinking Water Programs	6, 9, 47,110,119,125,227, 410, 662,691, 693, 696,698, 756, 810, 813, 888
E
Ecosystems	119, 125, 192, 400, 401, 404, 813
eEnterprise	836
E-Enterprise	168, 286, 390, 503
El Paso	277
Electronic Reporting	167,168, 247, 388,495, 640
Eliminated Programs	749, 819
Endocrine Disruptors	9,119,125, 375, 810, 813
Enforcementix, 5, 8, 37, 38, 40, 69, 117, 122, 167, 168, 170, 172, 173, 175, 177, 178, 180, 185, 254, 256, 263, 314,
440, 441, 457, 459, 460, 469, 474, 475, 477, 479, 481, 482, 485, 486, 559, 561, 563, 564, 587, 589, 591, 592,
596, 597, 607, 633, 634, 640, 750, 767,769, 770, 773, 800, 807, 809, 811, 814, 815, 816, 837, 887
Enforcement Training	773
Environmental Education	 114,118,123,192, 243,244, 245, 249, 812, 836
Environmental Justice..i, vii, viii, ix, 21, 26, 117, 121, 122, 153, 178, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 198, 240, 265, 289,
302, 303, 306, 376, 391, 395, 457, 459, 475, 477, 478, 490, 627, 652, 660, 672, 777, 790, 791, 811, 814, 834,
879, 880
EPA User Fee Program	749, 792
Exchange Network	118, 123, 246, 457, 460, 494, 613, 620, 622, 775, 776, 808, 812, 814, 888
Executive Management and Operations	118,123,249, 811
Expected Benefits of E-Government Initiatives	749, 820
F
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations...5, 8, 60, 62,119,124, 330, 445, 447, 452, 454, 457, 460, 504, 519, 521,
559, 561, 570, 587, 589, 600, 809, 812, 814, 815, 816
Federal Stationary Source Regulations	117,122,143, 810, 888
Federal Support for Air Quality Management	xii, 5,7,17,18,117,122,147, 651,652, 657, 809, 810, 888
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification	5,7,15,20,21, 809
Forensics Support	5, 8, 38,457, 460, 479, 809, 814
FY 2022 Evaluation Plan	729
G
General Counsel	293, 294, 304,786, 795
891

-------
Geographic Program
Chesapeake Bay	117,122,188, 81
Gulf of Mexico	117,122,191, 81
Lake Champlain	117,123,194, 81
Long Island Sound	117,123,197, 81
Geographic Programs	117, 121, 122, 123, 187, 188, 191, 194, 197, 199, 206, 209,211,214,81
Great Lakes Legacy Act	215
Great Lakes Restoration	117,123,214, 811
H
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund	3, 4, 325, 367, 516, 568, 713,715, 718, 794, 818, 826
Hazardous Waste Facilities	175
Homeland Security	5, 8, 33, 34, 41, 42, 46, 47, 48, 55, 69, 72, 117, 118, 123, 158, 221, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228,
229, 235, 236, 248, 282, 283, 442, 445, 447, 448, 449, 450, 457, 460, 487, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 496, 499,
500, 544, 631, 753, 761, 762, 763, 766, 787, 809,811, 814, 836, 864, 865, 871, 873, 875
Communication and Information	117,123,222,811
Critical Infrastructure Protection	5, 8, 42,118,123, 226, 809, 811
Human Health	104,105,156, 535, 536, 762
Human Health Risk Assessment	104, 535
Human Resources Management	 119,124, 336, 337, 457, 460, 525, 526, 812, 815, 888
I
Indoor Air.... 5, 7, 28, 29, 31, 33, 35, 118, 122, 230, 231, 233, 235, 237, 457, 459, 462, 463, 648, 809, 810, 811, 814,
836
Radon Program	5, 7, 29,118,122, 231, 809, 810
Indoor Air and Radiation ..5, 7, 28, 29, 31, 33, 35, 118, 122, 230, 231, 233, 235, 237, 457, 459, 462, 463, 809, 810,
811, 814
Information Exchange / Outreach. 123, 240, 243, 246, 249, 254, 257, 260, 262, 266, 457, 460, 493, 494, 811, 812,
814
Information Security..58, 118, 124, 223, 248, 281, 282, 283, 284, 287, 437, 439, 440, 457, 460, 468, 496, 498, 499,
500, 501, 504, 787, 799, 812, 815, 838, 880
Infrastructure Assistance	277, 607, 613,674, 676, 680,686, 816
Alaska Native Villages	613, 816
Clean Water SRF	613, 816
Drinking Water SRF	613, 816
Mexico Border	613, 816
Inspector General	3, 4, 43, 325, 327, 433, 435, 437, 438, 441, 443, 444, 459, 466, 467, 469, 471, 516, 517, 749,
773, 778, 779, 780, 799, 814, 851
Integrated Environmental Strategies	118,124,299, 812
International Programs	118,123,269, 270, 274,276, 812
International Sources of Pollution	118,123, 270, 812, 888
IT / Data Management	 5, 8, 56, 118, 124, 281, 285, 457, 460, 498, 502, 809, 812, 815, 888
IT / Data Management / Security	8, 56,124,281, 285, 460,498, 502, 809, 812, 815
L
Lake Pontchartrain	xii, 123, 200,203, 811
Lead Testing in Schools	608, 613,695, 817
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review	 124, 289, 292,294, 299, 304, 308, 311, 314, 318, 457, 460,
505, 506, 508, 812, 815
Legal Advice
Environmental Program	 118,124, 304, 457,460, 508, 812, 815,
Support Program	118,124, 308, 310, 812,
LUST / UST	 119, 125, 397, 559, 561, 573, 813, 816
LUST Cooperative Agreements	399, 559, 561, 575, 578, 580, 816
LUST Prevention	559, 561, 576,664, 816
892

-------
M
Major Management Challenges	749, 780
Marine Pollution	119,125,419, 813
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards	128, 441
Mexico Border	277, 607, 611, 686, 687, 688
Mississippi River Basin	402
Monitoring Grants	614, 817
N
Nanotechnology	103
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways	119,125,401, 813
NEPA Implementation	117,122,185,186, 811, 888
O
Office of Administration and Resource Management	838
Office of Air and Radiation	733, 836, 844, 845, 846, 848, 849, 857
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Protection	xv, 305, 342, 729,735, 765, 827, 828, 837, 849, 850, 857
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.. 168,174, 730,750, 782, 784,785, 837, 849, 851, 853, 854,
855, 857, 858, 859, 874, 875, 884, 886, 887
Office of General Counsel	304, 837, 851
Office of International Affairs	838
Office of International and Tribal Affairs	838, 842
Office of Land and Emergency Management	x, xi, 93,163, 364, 397, 531, 541, 573, 576, 578, 583, 618, 671,
672, 736, 738, 739, 740, 782, 784, 838, 843, 844, 851, 853, 854, 857
Office Of Mission Support	309, 741, 742, 781, 782, 783, 795, 834, 838, 861, 875
Office Of Research and Development....82, 83, 84, 87, 90, 91, 95, 97, 98, 103, 454, 725, 735, 737, 738, 743, 744,
827, 828, 834, 839, 851, 855, 864
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response	851
Office of the Administrator	294, 795, 834, 836
Office of the Chief Financial Officer	 309, 326, 516, 782, 783,785, 790, 795, 834, 836, 843, 844, 861
Office Of the Inspector General	XV, 57, 65, 66, 282, 309, 347, 390, 437, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444, 466,
467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 499, 778, 779, 780, 783, 784, 785, 786, 787, 789, 790, 837, 840, 841, 844, 846, 848,
849, 850, 851, 857
Office Of Water	745, 827, 839, 855, 858, 863
Oil 3, 4, 33, 40, 54, 60, 90, 130, 145, 151, 167, 171, 173, 176, 235, 330, 405, 415, 452, 473, 517, 519, 530, 543, 544,
564, 570, 582, 587, 589, 591, 592, 593, 594, 595, 597, 598, 600, 603, 605, 606, 738, 739, 762, 782, 799, 816
Oil Spill
Prevention, Preparedness and Response	587, 589,594, 816
OP	777, 790
Operations and Administration..5, 8, 59, 60, 119, 124, 320, 321, 325, 330, 333, 336, 445, 447, 451, 452, 457, 460,
511, 512, 516, 519, 522, 525, 559, 561, 566, 567, 568, 570, 587, 589, 599, 600, 809, 812, 814, 815, 816, 818
Pesticide Safety Education Program	347, 349, 354
Pesticides
Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk	5, 8, 64,119,124, 344, 809, 812, 888
Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability	5, 8, 71,119,124, 359, 809, 813, 888
Pesticides Licensing	 5, 8, 63, 64, 68, 71, 119, 124, 340, 341, 344, 351, 359, 809, 812, 813
Pollution Prevention..XV, 16, 54, 80, 99, 100, 103, 106, 119, 125, 142, 265, 305, 313, 378, 380, 382, 439, 468, 607,
629, 642, 643, 644, 729, 735, 749, 764, 799, 808, 813, 827, 828, 837, 849, 857
Pollution Prevention Program	99,100,106,119,125, 378, 643, 749,764, 813
Program Projects by Program Area	809
Proposed FY 2022 Administrative Provisions	749, 825
Protect Human Health	357, 362
Puget Sound	xii, 117, 123,211,212,213,811,876
893

-------
R
Radiation	5, 7, 29, 31, 32, 33, 49, 53, 106, 118, 122, 233, 234, 235, 306, 457, 459, 463, 733, 734, 749, 751, 753,
754, 755, 782, 784, 800, 809, 810, 814, 836, 837, 844, 848, 861
Protection	5, 7, 31, 118, 122, 233, 459, 463, 809, 810, 814
Response Preparedness	5,7, 33,118,122,235,809, 810
RCRA
Corrective Action	119,124, 364, 813
Waste Management	 119,124, 367,713,715,718, 813,818, 888
Waste Minimization & Recycling	119,125, 371, 813
Recovery Act ..vi, 40, 54, 165, 171, 176, 179, 190, 225, 311, 312, 313, 399, 440, 531, 575, 580, 625, 718, 800, 805,
853
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air	5, 7, 35,118,122, 237, 809, 810
Reducing Lead in Drinking Water	608, 613,693, 817
Regional Science and Technology	118,124,311, 812
Regions	 93, 170, 297, 442, 470, 531, 583, 851, 855, 857, 858, 860, 861, 862
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis	118,124, 314, 812
Research
Air and Energy	5,74, 818
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources	8,82, 810
Sustainable Communities	8, 90,460, 530, 561, 582, 589, 603, 810, 815, 816
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)... 16,103,119,124,125,142,169,173,248, 273, 275,279,
291, 305, 363, 364, 366, 367, 370, 371, 373, 623, 629, 713, 715, 716, 718, 719, 737, 738, 761, 813, 818
Safe and Sustainable Water Resources	6, 8, 81, 82,743, 810
Safe Water for Small & Disadvantaged Communities	608,613, 691, 816
San Francisco Bay	xii, 117,123, 209, 210, 811
Science Advisory Board	xiv, 118,124, 316, 318, 812, 836, 888
Science Policy and Biotechnology	119,124, 341, 812
Security...xv, 20, 27, 42, 43, 46, 47, 52, 54, 78, 80, 118, 141, 222, 223, 224, 225, 227, 228, 272, 280, 282, 283, 308,
321, 326, 452, 457, 491, 497, 499, 500, 501, 512, 752, 754, 755, 762, 763, 772, 774, 786, 797, 798, 844, 851,
864, 865, 871, 880, 881
Sewer Overflow Control Grants	608,613, 701, 817
Sign Language	338, 527
Small Business Ombudsman	118,123,254, 255, 812
Small Minority Business Assistance	118,123, 257, 812
Special Accounts	827
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness	118,123,260, 811, 888
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)	277, 378, 607,613, 614, 667,668, 671, 674,676, 680, 685,686,
689, 691, 693, 695, 697, 699, 701, 703, 816, 817
Stratospheric Ozone
Domestic Programs	117,122,155, 810
Multilateral Fund	117,122,160, 810
Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal	458,461, 541, 815
Enforcement	457,460, 481, 814
EPA Emergency Preparedness	458,461, 544, 815
Federal Facilities	458,461, 549, 815
Federal Facilities Enforcement	457, 460, 485, 814
Remedial	458,461,546,815
Superfund Cleanup	458, 460, 461, 540, 541, 544, 546, 549, 815
Superfund Special Accounts	458, 552
Surface Water Protection	119,125, 402, 421, 813, 888
Sustainable and Healthy Communities	 6, 8,79, 90, 95, 458, 460, 530, 533, 559, 562, 582, 584, 585, 587, 589,
603, 605, 744, 810, 815, 816
894

-------
Targeted Airshed Grants	608, 613, 689,690, 816
Technical Assistance for Treatment Works	608, 613,699, 817
Toxic Substances
Chemical Risk Management	125, 813
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction	119,125, 383, 813
Lead Risk Reduction	119,125, 392, 813
Lead Risk Reduction Program	119,125, 392, 813
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention	 119,125, 374, 375, 378, 383, 392, 813
Trade and Governance	118,123, 274,275, 812
TRI / Right to Know	118,123, 262, 811, 888
Tribal - Capacity Building	118,123, 266, 811, 888
u
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)	 125, 397, 561, 573, 576, 578, 813, 816
US Mexico Border	 118, 123, 276, 277, 607, 611, 686, 687, 688, 812
W
Water
Human Health Protection	6, 9,109,110,119,125,407, 408,410,810,813
Water Infrastructure and Workforce Investment	608, 614,703, 817
Water Quality Monitoring	206
Water Quality Protection	 119,125, 206,207, 208, 418,419, 421, 705,708, 709, 710, 813, 818
Water Quality Research and Support Grants	6, 9,114,119,125, 431, 810, 813, 819
Wetlands	88, 119, 125, 206, 403, 404, 405, 607, 665, 666, 797, 799, 804, 813, 839
WIFIA	iii, iv, 426, 677, 679, 682, 684, 700, 702, 704, 705, 708, 710, 711, 712, 723, 794, 800
Working Capital Fund	55, 228, 325, 449, 491, 749, 772, 795, 828
895

-------
890

-------