United States
Environmental Protection Agency
FISCAL YEAR 2023
Justification of Appropriation
Estimates for the Committee
on Appropriations
Tab 17: Appendix
April 2022
EPA-190-R-22-001	www.epa.gov/cj

-------
Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2023 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Table of Contents - Appendix
Coordination with Other Federal Agencies	1029
Acronyms for Statutory Authority	1064
Making Litigation Costs Transparent- Equal Access for Justice Act (EAJA)	1069
FY 2023 Congressional Justification Estimated Resources and FTE for Environmental
Justice Program1	1073
EPA Budget by National Program Manager and Major Office	1074
EPA User Fee Programs	1077
Expected Benefits of E-Government Initiatives	1081
FY 2023 Administrator's Priorities	1086
FY 2023: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfer of Resources	1087
FY 2023 STAG Categorical Program Grants	1088
Agency Response To Office Of Inspector General FY 2022 Key Management Challenges
Report, Issued November 12, 2021	1097
Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance (OECA) Travel by Program Project FY
2017- FY 2023	1105
On-Site Inspections and Off-Site Compliance Monitoring Compliance Activities From
EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System	1106
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Plan	1108
Program Projects by Program Area	1112
Eliminated Programs	1123
Proposed FY 2023 Administrative Provisions	1124
Plan for Implementing the Policies and Directives of Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments	1129
062S. 2276 - Good Accounting Obligation in Government Act	1136
EPA OIG Open Recommendations and Corrective Actions	1137
Working Capital Fund	1180
1027

-------
1028

-------
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 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 National Park Service (NPS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and DOI 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.
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 National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (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.
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
1029

-------
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 USFS work closely with states to
deploy monitors and report monitoring information and other conditions on AirNow. The AirNow
Program also collaborates with NPS and 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, USD A, and 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 for 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 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 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
Department of Energy (DOE) and DOT to fund applied research projects including transportation
modeling projects. EPA also works closely with DOE on refinery cost modeling analyses to
support clean fuel programs, and coordinates with 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 DOE, DOT, and other agencies, as needed, on
the requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act
1030

-------
of2007, 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, National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and 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 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), 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 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 multilateral environmental agreements to simultaneously protect the
ozone layer and climate system working closely with the DOS and other federal agencies,
including but not limited to the Office of Science Technology and Policy (OSTP), Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ), Department of Commerce (DOC), OMB, USD A NOAA, and
NASA.
EPA works with other agencies, including the Office of the United States Trade Representative
(USTR) and 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.
1031

-------
Radiation and Radiation Preparedness and Response
EPA works primarily with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), DOE, and 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
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), NRC, DOE, DOD, 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 Housing
and Urban Development (HUD), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), DOE, USD A,
DOS, US AID, DOI, and 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
1032

-------
to advance methane recovery and use methane as a clean energy source. EPA works with DOS 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 DOS 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. EPA will support the State Department and National Science Foundation with applying
applicable goals and GHG mitigation policies in the review of environmental evaluations for non-
Governmental activities in Antarctica consistent with Antarctica Treaty Commission
commitments.
Research Supporting the Air and Radiation Program
EPA continues to coordinate with other agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH),
NOAA, DOE, USD A, and FHWA to develop sustainable approaches to manage air pollution risks.
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. In addition, 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
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.
1033

-------
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 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.
In addition, 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 DOD, DOE, USD A, FDA, DHHS, theNIH, 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, DHHS's Indian Health Service (IHS), HUD, USD A, and
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) / Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJ A)
Coordination work with other federal agencies also will support EPA's BIL/IIJA implementation
priorities.
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 the 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.
1034

-------
Coordination with Department of Defense on Analytical Methods for Detecting PFAS
EPA's Clean Water Act (CWA) analytical methods program is collaborating with 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, 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). It 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. In addition, 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 collaborative
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 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), DOE,
DOI, DOT, and DOJ to share information on carbon capture and storage developments. In
addition, 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
1035

-------
inform science and risk-based decision-making at geologic sequestration projects; and to explore
opportunities to integrate the partnership work into EPA's Class VI permitting process. EPA also
will collaborate with DOE and CEQ on several reports and other initiatives related to carbon
sequestration requested by Congress, including developing a report on UIC Class VI permitting.
Through the CAA §309 review program, EPA is collaborating with DOE and other agencies as
needed to assist with identifying potential impacts and ways to avoid and minimize those impacts
from CO2 storage projects.
Drinking Water and Wastewater Work 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.1
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.
1 For additional information, please visit: https://www.epa.gov/tribal/federal-infrastructure-task-force-improve-access-safe-
drinking-water-and-basic-sanitation.
1036

-------
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
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 target 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
1037

-------
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 PFAS; ensuring Applicable or Relevant
and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) are identified and implemented; coordination with
civilian federal agencies; Performance-Based Contracting; 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, chemicals of emerging concern, and performance-based optimization of
pump and treat systems.
Through the establishment of a national cleanup dialogue with the 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 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 (MRD), 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 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.
1038

-------
EPA 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 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 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 (e.g., construction and demolition materials) to
advance a circular economy. EPA works closely with other federal agencies to implement EPA's
2021 National Recycling Strategy, the 2020 Save our Seas Act 2.0, and the 2021 Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), as well as develop additional strategies on plastics, food waste
and organics, critical minerals and electronics, textiles, and the built environment.
EPA works collaboratively with USDA, and the 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.
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 is coordinating with DOE, several offices within the DOC (NIST, NOAA, USTR and ITA);
and USAID to implement Save our Seas. EPA also works with federal agencies to implement Save
Our Seas 2.0.
The IIJA was enacted on November 15, 2021. The IIJA provides funding for grants under section
302(a) of the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act as well as education and outreach grants focused on improving
material recycling, recovery, management. The IIJA also establishes new programs focused on
battery recycling and directs EPA to develop a model recycling program toolkit, increase
coordination on federal procurement guidelines, and provide assistance to the educational
community to incorporate recycling best practices into curriculum. EPA will coordinate closely
with DOE on the development of battery recycling best practices and the voluntary labeling
program, as DOE also received significant new IIJA funding to advance battery recycling.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Poly chlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Programs
1039

-------
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, DOS, DOD, DHS/FEMA, DOE, USD A, DHHS
(including CDC, NIOSH, and ATSDR), DOI, DOC, DOT, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), DOJ, and the U.S. Department of Labor [DOL]
[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 two
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 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
1040

-------
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.
Chemical Accident Prevention and Response
Under CAA Section 112(r), EPA administers the Oil Spill Risk Management Program (RMP)
regulations designed to prevent and respond to chemical accidents at fixed facilities that use or
store large quantities of highly toxic or flammable substances in a process. In administering these
regulations, EPA collaborates closely with other federal agencies, including DOL, DOT, DHS,
and others. An important nexus for this collaboration is the National Working Group on Chemical
Safety and Security, which includes participation by EPA, DOL/OSHA, DHS, DOT, and BATF.
The Working Group was initially formed as a result of Executive Order 13650 - Improving
Chemical Facility Safety and Security - which tasked federal agencies with various actions to
further improve chemical facility safety and security in coordination with facility owners and
operators. Through the Working Group, EPA works with federal agency partners to share
information, develop fact sheets and guidance, and coordinate regulatory and policy actions
relating to chemical safety and security. EPA also conducts additional regular coordination with
DOL and OSHA, which administer the OSHA Process Safety Management standard, a regulation
that shares common provisions with EPA's RMP regulations.
Under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, EPA administers regulations
that establish the list of extremely hazardous substances for community emergency response
planning, as well as regulations that establish chemical inventory and release reporting
requirements. In administering these regulations, EPA works closely with DOT, DHS, FEMA,
and other agencies that are involved in planning for chemical emergencies. For example, EPA
collaborates with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to develop the
Computer Aided Management of Emergency Operations (CAMEO) software suite and Tier II
Submit software, which provide free computer software tools to help fire departments, local
emergency agencies and other stakeholders manage chemical inventory information and develop
and implement emergency response plans.
Oil Spills
EPA is responsible for maintaining the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP), which sets out the federal government's blueprint for responding to oil
spills. More specifically, the NCP details federal responsibilities and procedures for preparing for
and responding to discharges of oil or releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants
in inland and coastal zones of the U.S. EPA is authorized to amend the NCP in consultation with
other federal agencies. Under the NCP, EPA serves as the pre-designated On-Scene Coordinator
for oil discharges in the inland zone. As part of its responsibilities, EPA also maintains a list—
called the Product Schedule—of dispersants and other chemical and bioremediation products that
may be authorized for use during a spill.
1041

-------
EPA helps 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 BSEE in their implementation.
EPA serves as member of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on Oil Pollution Research
(ICCOPR) established under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. ICCOPR coordinates a comprehensive
program of oil pollution research, technology development, and demonstration among federal
agencies in cooperation and coordination with external entities, such as industry, universities,
research institutions, state governments, and other nations, as appropriate. Comprised of 16 federal
agencies, ICCOPR is chaired by USCG, with EPA having served in a rotating Vice Chair capacity.
ICCOPR develops priorities for oil spill research across the federal government on a 6-year cycle
and prepares biennial reports to Congress on research activities and key interagency committee
activities.
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.
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 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
1042

-------
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 USDA 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, USDA, 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.
Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Programs
National Coordination for General Issues Relating to 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 the scoping of existing
chemicals for risk evaluation and associated draft risk evaluations. Additionally, EPA has initiated
regular engagement with both NIOSH and OSHA to discuss occupational exposure assessments
and risk management.
EPA also engages in biannual meetings with the OMNE2 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
2 The OMNE Committee is named for the first letter in each participating agency's name.
1043

-------
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 for EPA
Actions under the December 2018 Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and
Associated Health Impacts3 and Progress Report on the Federal Action Plan to Reduce Childhood
Lead Exposures and Associated Health Impacts.4 In FY 2022 and FY 2023, 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 effectively in international agreements addressing chemicals and pesticide
management (e.g., the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, the Minamata
Convention on Mercury, the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedures for
Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, the Strategic Approach to
International Chemicals Management, CODEX Alimentarius, and a wide range of multilateral,
regional, and bilateral free trade agreements), EPA coordinates with other federal agencies, such
as the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), DOS, DOC, USDA, DOE, FDA, and
DHHS 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 the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (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.
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
3	For additional information, please visit: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
04/documents/leadimplementationbooklet	april2019.pdf.
4	For additional information, please visit: https://www.epa.gov/leadactionplanimplementation/progress-report-federal-action-
plan-reduce-childhood-lead-exposures.
1044

-------
targeted efforts and technical working groups. In 2022-2024, for example, under OCSPP's
leadership, EPA is working within the USMCA's CEC with Canada and Mexico on a project to
explore supply chain transparency to identify innovative approaches and digital tools supporting
the identification and disclosure of chemical contents in goods and materials. The project is
intended to foster best practices for information exchanges and collaboration and to engage
different industry sectors, environmental experts, and government and technical authorities.
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, among others working groups and committees, 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.
Capacity Building and Technical Assistance
EPA also participates significantly with other Agencies and international organizations in the
development, coordination, and delivery of capacity-building and technical assistance. For
example, OCSPP is collaborating with USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service and the Inter-
American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture to address the many inquiries from foreign
countries on pesticide registrations, standard setting processes, maximum residue level (MRL)
harmonization, and risk assessment procedures.
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 USDA to supplement data from the pesticide industry 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.
1045

-------
Endangered Species & Pollinator Protection
EPA will continue collaborating with the USD A, 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.
Homeland Security - Protecting Food & Agriculture Sectors
EPA collaborates with the agencies such as DOD, DHS, DHHS, USDA, 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) and State and Tribal Stakeholder Groups
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. EPA also works
extensively with the Association of American Pest Control Officials and the Tribal Pesticide
Program Council to maximize communication with states, tribes, and territories on pesticide
implementation issues.
General Research to Support Chemical Safety
EPA participates in a multi-agency effort under the Tox21 Consortium. 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
1046

-------
testing program.5'6 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 Tox21 Consortium has
screened thousands of chemicals with more than 70 assays, resulting in more than 120 million data
points which can inform decision making regarding the safety of chemicals. The full Tox21 library
comprises approximately equal sized contributions from EPA, National Toxicology Program
(NTP), and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS).
PFAS are a large, diverse class of chemicals that have been widely used in industry and consumer
products and are ubiquitous in the environment. EPA is committed to working collaboratively with
federal, state, tribal and local partners to address the challenges posed by PFAS. Efforts include
working with other federal agencies to address scientific challenges such as the lack of published
toxicity data for most 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. EPA anticipates increased interagency
collaboration on PFAS research and development efforts through an OSTP-led interagency
working group, established as required by the FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act.
Resources requested in FY 2023 will build upon the research foundation formed from completed
work.
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. EPA also coordinates, respectively, with:
ATSDR, through an MOU on the development of toxicological reviews and toxicology profiles;
5	Collins, F.S., Gray, G.M., and Bucher, J.R. (2008). Transforming environmental health protection. Science, 319, 906-907. doi:
1.0.1.126/science.l 1.5461.9.
6	Tice. R.R.. Austin. C.P.. Kavlock. R.J.. and Bucher. J.R. (201.3). Improving the human hazard characterization of chemicals: a
Tox21. update. Environmental Health Perspectives. 121, 756-765. doi: 1.0.1289/ehp. 1.205784.
1047

-------
NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program, on assessment methodology, software, and assay
development platforms; FDA on advisories and reports; and DOD on assessment development
methods. In addition, EPA contracts with the National Academy of Sciences' National Research
Council (NRC) on very difficult and complex human health 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:
•	DO J 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;
•	DOI's BIA, 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; and,
•	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.
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 chemical and pesticide
imports, hazardous waste and Cathode Ray Tube exports, imports of internal combustion vehicles
and engines that do not meet Clean Air Act requirements, as well as on a variety of other
import/export issues under the various statutes.
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. EPA, FDA, and FAA jointly regulate drinking water
1048

-------
safety on airlines via the Aircraft Drinking Water Rule. The Agency has entered into an agreement
with 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 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 FBI, CBP, DOL, U.S. Treasury, DHS,
DOI, USCG, 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
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 with the Federal Facilities Environmental Stewardship and Compliance Assistance Center
(FedCenter) ("www.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.
EPA has commenced a number of specific collaborative efforts to work one-on-one with other
federal agencies to help foster productive relationships through environmental compliance
outreach efforts. We have developed partnerships with other federal agency headquarters offices
including, for example, HHS, BIA, DOD, DOE, and NASA to discuss EPA's compliance
initiatives and explore ways EPA can best help federal agencies remain aware of their
environmental compliance status and requirements nationwide. We have instituted a biweekly
1049

-------
dialogue with DOD to help address compliance issues at housing for military personnel with a
particular focus on compliance with lead-based paint requirements.
In the context of EPA's compliance initiatives, the Agency proactively addresses potential
significant noncompliance by sending letters to federal agencies highlighting facility
noncompliance so facilities can expeditiously take the necessary actions to address the compliance
issues. EPA also has issued multiple compliance advisories geared to other federal agencies
providing information on the Agency's compliance initiatives.
Superfund Enforcement
EPA 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.
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, EPA has completed an MOU with FLMAs to
improve the efficient and effective use of federal resources to cleanup at mixed ownership mining
sites. EPA 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
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.
EPA's Superfund Federal Facilities Enforcement Program 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. EPA also has
established a partnership with ECOS and DOE, the DOE Dialogue, to build relationships and
tackle enduring challenges at DOE cleanup sites.
1050

-------
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 USD A, 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.
Tackling the Climate Crisis, Accelerating Environmental and Economic Justice
EPA works with international partners, such as foreign governments and international
organizations, to deploy assistance that can strengthen on the ground action to tackle the climate
crisis, reduce transboundary pollution that impacts local communities and travels through the
environment to impact other communities across the globe, and that strengthen fundamental
environmental rule of law. An important example of this work is EPA's engagement in the Group
of Seven (G7) and the Group of Twenty (G20) through environment ministerial meetings which
negotiate outcomes on key EPA issues such as climate change, food waste, marine litter, resource
efficiency, and air quality. EPA's engagement with international financial institutions, United
Nations (UN) entities, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation (OECD).
Supporting Environmental Priorities in Global Trade Policy and Implementation of
Environmental Cooperation Agreements
Since the 1972 Trade Act mandated USTR 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 USTR in the development of U.S.
international trade and investment policy.
EPA continues 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
1051

-------
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 U.S. Treasury, State Department, USAID, 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. Further, EPA collaborates with
DOS, the Government of Canada, tribes, federal agencies, and other stakeholders to address
transboundary water pollution caused by historic and current mining practices in the Kootenai
watershed.
Working in Indian Country
EPA is an active participant in the White House Council on Native American Affairs (WHCNAA).
The WHCNNA is an interagency Principals-level council established by President Obama's
Executive Order 13647 in June 2013, in response to requests from tribal leaders across Indian
country for a Cabinet-level council to uphold treaty and trust obligations, support the Nation-to-
Nation relationship, and improve tribal engagement and consultation. The Biden-Harris
Administration has reconvened the WHCNAA and established six sub-committees: Climate
Change, Tribal Homelands, and Treaties; Health; Education; Economic Development; Energy and
Infrastructure; Public Safety and Justice; and International Indigenous Issues.
EPA serves as the co-lead (with DOI and USD A) of the Climate Change, Tribal Homelands, and
Treaties Committee. Within this Committee, EPA is a co-lead and lead on two subcommittees,
including the Tribal Treaty Rights MOU Subcommittee and the Climate Adaptation
Subcommittee. Both this Committee and the Subcommittees meet on a regular basis.
EPA also serves as the co-lead (with DOI and the DOS) on the International Indigenous Issues
Committee. Within this Committee, EPA is co-lead on three subcommittees, including Human
Rights and Environmental Justice, Cross Border Issues, and Climate Crisis. Both this Committee
and the Subcommittees meet on a regular basis.
1052

-------
Additionally, EPA is involved as a participant in the Health Committee and is an active participant
on the Water/Sanitation Subcommittee. Both this Committee and the Subcommittee meet on a
regular basis.
EPA continues work as a federal partner under the federal interagency Memorandum of
Understanding Regarding Interagency Coordination and Collaboration for the Protection of Tribal
Treaty Rights and Reserved Rights which was signed by the EPA Administrator on August 5,
2021. The signatories to affirm their commitment to protect tribal treaty rights, reserved rights and
similar tribal rights to natural and cultural resources and work to demonstrate that commitment
through early consideration of treaty and reserved rights in agency decision-making and regulatory
processes.
Central Planning, Budgeting and Finance Programs
Working with Federal Partners on Improving Management and Accountability throughout the
Federal Government
EPA coordinates appropriately with Congress and other federal agencies, such as the U.S.
Treasury, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and GSA. EPA participates and makes
active contributions to standing interagency management committees, including:
•	the Chief Financial Officers Council, which focuses on improving resources management
and accountability throughout the federal government;
•	the Performance Improvement Council, which 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 Federal Assistance Awards Data System;
•	the President's Management Council, which oversees developing and implementing Cross-
Agency Priority (CAP) goals; and
•	the Evaluation Officer Council, which serves as a forum to exchange information with the
broader Federal evaluation community.
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. Relocation services are provided internally to all EPA offices, and externally to the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
(ATF), DOL, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), United States Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO), Health and Human Services Office of Global Affairs (HHS-OGA), and United States
Agency of Global Media (USAGM).
1053

-------
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.
•	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 Grants Quality Service Management Office (QSMO) leads efforts to transform the
federal grants management process by focusing on standardization and modernization of
grants systems to increase efficiency and reduce burden for grant applicants, recipients,
and the federal grants workforce; and better leveraging the buying power of the government
to access high-quality shared solutions and reduce costs. The Grants QSMO supports the
work of OMB's Office of Federal Financial Management and Office of the Federal Chief
Information Officer and GSA's Office of Shared Solutions and Performance Improvement.
•	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
1054

-------
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
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 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 White
House/CEQ, the CDC/ATSDR, and the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council. SEE
enrollees provide administrative, technical, and professional support to these agencies for
projects relating to pollution prevention, abatement, and control.
Partnership which is designed to reduce the administrative burdens associated with
research grants.
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 Offices
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.
1055

-------
Work with the Department of Interior's Interior Business Center
In FY 2023, 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 (LoB) 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 LoB vision, goals, and objectives.
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.
The Chief Data Officer (CDO) Council
The CDO Council was established by statute in the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking
Act of 2018. The Council's vision is to improve government mission achievement and increase
the benefits to the Nation through improvement in the management, use, protection, dissemination,
and generation of data in government decision-making and operations.
eRulemaking
The eRulemaking Program is a Federal E-Government shared 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.
1056

-------
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.
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.
1057

-------
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,
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.
Federal Executive Boards
The Federal Executive Boards will be established in FY 2023. This LoB will replace the current
ad hoc structure and provide more support to regional Federal Executive Board staff members. In
line with the Biden Administration's initiatives, the Federal Executive Boards will support and
strengthen the Federal Workforce.
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 benefit-cost 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 benefits and costs of
federal policies and programs. Occasionally, OP also provides technical reviews of other agencies
research and analyses. In addition, OP's Office of Federal Activities, engages early with the lead
federal agency and supports CEQ for significant regulatory actions that require compliance with
1058

-------
National Environmental Policy Act via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In so doing,
EPA provides technical assistance, as needed, to help scope and develop the draft EIS,
recommending ways to avoid and minimize impacts to improve environmental outcomes.
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, including lead, asthma disparities, climate change,
emergencies, and disasters. 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 the Interagency Policy Council's
groups on Maternal Health and Child Development, as well as 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. This work supports not only
Presidential Executive Order (EO) 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks, but also addresses climate change and environmental justice under
Presidential EO 14008: Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.
Climate Adaptation and Resilience
Presidential EO 14008 on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad created the National
Climate Task Force which facilitates the organization and deployment of a government-wide
approach to combat the climate crisis. A key component of this is to increase resilience to the
impacts of climate change and to protect public health; conserve our lands, waters, oceans, and
biodiversity. EPA works with FEMA, DOT, DOI, NOAA, HUD, BIA, HHS, and many other
agencies to ensure our programs, infrastructure investments, remedies and communities are
resilient to the immediate and long-term impacts of the changing climate both within the task force
and through the full breadth of partnership EPA has with OF As. In June 2013, the White House
Council on Native American Affairs was established by EO. In June 2021, a subgroup on Tribal
Climate Adaptation was created, chaired by EPA, to enable a whole-of-government approach to
supporting tribes as they anticipate, prepare for, adapt to, and recover from the devastating impacts
of climate change. EPA participates in interagency efforts related to climate change and the
Nation's coasts. EPA is engaging the NIST's Climate Resiliency Program to share experiences,
expertise, and support areas of mutual interests.
Environmental Justice
Presidential EO 14008 on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad enhanced and
expanded several important means of interagency coordination and collaboration related to
1059

-------
environmental justice. EO 14008 elevated the existing Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice, formerly chaired by EPA, to the White House Environmental Justice
Interagency Council (IAC), chaired by the 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 EO 14008, the IAC will work to achieve the
goal that forty percent of federal benefits from certain federal programs flow to 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 EO
12898 and provide leadership to interagency efforts to address current and historic environmental
injustices. As stipulated in EO 14008, 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.
Community Revitalization and Sustainable Communities
OP participates in several Interagency Working Groups (IWG) and Interagency Policy Committees
(IPC), including the Rural Prosperity IPC, Food Strategy IPC, and the Coal and Powerplant
Communities IWG. These interagency efforts support improving community outcomes on a range
of issues including climate resilience, economic transition, diversification, prosperity, and
environmental protection. These work groups have grown out of recent executive orders and policy
initiatives taken on by the Administration. OP works collaboratively with national program offices
and EPA regions to support their involvement in these interagency efforts so that the full range of
EPA equities are at the table and engaged to advance Administration priorities.
As part of the Coal and Power Communities Interagency Work group (IWG), OP is working
closely with the eleven other federal agencies to support coal, oil and gas, and power plant
communities to create good-paying union jobs, spur economic revitalization, remediate
environmental degradation, and support energy workers. OP is actively participating in the IWG's
working group activities, including community engagement, integration, policy, and investments.
OP also is supporting the efforts of the IWG by engaging with EPA's regional offices (particularly
1060

-------
R3 and R5) as well as national programs to support the Administration's efforts to help coal and
power plant communities transition their economies.
The EPA Administrator co-chairs a new Extreme Heat IWG and OP's Associate Administrator is
co-leading the work group with colleagues from HHS and NOAA with over a dozen federal
agencies and White House participation. OP also is working alongside OAR and OEJ to contribute
knowledge and experience related to smart growth and green infrastructure on climate adaptation
approaches to help communities reduce the occurrence and impact of extreme heat (advancing
both climate adaptation and mitigation).
OP is working with EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, DOT, and DOE to explore interagency
approaches that advance the Administration's priorities and Presidential commitments on electric
vehicles. This work has a specific emphasis on helping communities distribute charging
infrastructure equitably, in low-income neighborhoods in both rural and urban areas.
OP has several inter-agency efforts on priority projects funded through the American Rescue Plan.
OP is working with DOT and HUD to ensure that infrastructure funding investments advance
communities' visions and priorities. OP also is working with federal partners to advance
community-level efforts to simultaneously advance community priorities climate goals. Both of
these projects model the application of a community-driven approach to efficiently advance
agencies' mission. They also demonstrate an effective way to advance the goals outlined in EO
14008 on addressing the climate crisis and environmental justice.
OP is the lead on EPA's Memorandum of Agreement with FEMA, which allows the two agencies
to work together to help communities become safer, healthier, and more resilient. The agencies
collaborate to help communities hit by disasters rebuild in ways that protect the environment,
create long-term economic prosperity, and enhance neighborhoods. FEMA and EPA also help
communities incorporate strategies, such as green infrastructure, into their hazard mitigation plans
and direct development away from vulnerable areas. EPA and FEMA are using the lessons they
learn from working together under this agreement and with other federal agencies to better
coordinate assistance to communities on hazard mitigation planning, climate adaptation actions,
and post-disaster recovery. OP coordinates closely with all 10 Regions and many National
Programs on this partnership.
OP is using an interagency agreement with GSA to update the Smart Location Calculator to give
the federal government more information to guide decisions about locating new federal
investments. GSA and EPA also are collaborating on development and technical assistance around
a new site selection support tool to help GSA and other federal agencies make decisions on where
to site new government facilities informed by the cost local and state governments would likely
incur to provide infrastructure and services. The tool will be based on known relationships between
the built environment and the cost to provide infrastructure for a site and related costs for operation
and maintenance over time. EPA also has historically coordinated with GSA on their Good
Neighbor Program by helping communities leverage major federal investments, such as
courthouses or ports of entry, to focus on downtown revitalization.
1061

-------
OP has in the past and continues to coordinate with agencies and departments that work in
communities across the country. This has been through formal and semi-formal arrangements like
the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities (PSC) and Strong Cities, Strong
Communities (SC2). Further, OP has a number of Interagency Agreements (IA) and Memoranda
of Agreements to partner with other agencies on technical assistance in areas like disaster recovery,
capacity building at the community level, and economic revitalization that supports improved
environmental and human health results. Partnering agencies include and have included: USDA
(Rural Development, Forest Service, Agricultural Marketing Service), DOT, FEMA, GSA, HUD,
HHS, Appalachian Regional Commission, Northern Border Regional Commission, Delta Regional
Authority, and EDA. These agencies often participate in community workshops that OP offers
through technical assistance programs such as: Local Foods, Local Places, Building Blocks, and
Recreation Economy for Rural Communities.
Interagency Policy Committees
EPA participates in interagency groups and collaborates with federal partners on the
implementation of Executive Orders including EO 14017 on America's Supply Chains, Climate
Innovation, Climate and Economics, and the US-EU Summit on Trade and Technology Council.
EPA is working with NSC, NEC, CEQ, DOC, DOE, DOD, State, and other agencies on supply
chain issues associated with semiconductors, critical minerals, EV batteries, and other critical
materials. EPA also actively participates on the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council,
the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment and the Interagency Policy
Committee (IPC) on Workforce Development and the White House Gender Policy Council.
Interagency Council on Statistical Policy
The Interagency Council on Statistical Policy (ICSP) is the coordinating body for the Federal
Statistical System and plays a leading role in implementing the Evidence Act and advancing the
Federal Data Strategy. The ICSP sets strategic goals for modernizing agency statistical practices
and products and advances those goals through cross-agency collaborations on strategic initiatives.
EPA will continue to work with the ICSP to advance the Federal statistics and availability of robust
information to support evidence-based policy.
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.
1062

-------
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.
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.
1063

-------
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
1064

-------
CZMA: Coastal Zone Management Act
DERA: Diesel Emissions Reduction Act
DPA: Deepwater Ports Act
DREAA: Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
DWWIA: Drinking Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Act of 2021
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)
ERDDAA: 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
FFATA: Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
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)
FISMA: Federal Information Security Modernization Act
FITARA: Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act
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
1065

-------
FQPA: Food Quality Protection Act (1996)
FRA: Federal Register Act
FSA: Food Security Act
FSMA: Food Safety Modernization Act
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
IIJA: Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 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
MCRBMA: Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act
MGT: Modernizing Government Technology Act
MPPRCA: Marine Plastic Pollution, Research and Control Act of 1987
MPRSA: Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act
NAWCA: North American Wetlands Conservation Act
NEEA: National Environmental Education 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
1066

-------
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)
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
SOS 2.0: 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 Implementation Act
USTCA: Underground Storage Tank Compliance Act
VIDA: Vessel Incidental Discharge Act
WIFIA: Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
1067

-------
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
1068

-------
Making Litigation Costs Transparent- Equal Access for Justice Act (EAJA)7
FY 2021
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
Attorney8
Hourly
Rate of
Expert
Witness
8/13/2021
Californians
for Renewable
Energy, etal.
v.EPA
U.S.
District
Court for
the
Northern
District of
California
Oakland
Division
4:15-cv-
03292-
SBA
Judge
Saundra B.
Armstrong
$850,000
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Earthjustice
Five claims of unreasonable
delay/agency action unlawfully
withheld for failure to meet the
regulatory deadline and one claim
alleging a pattern and practice of
unreasonable delay/agency action
unlawfully withheld under
§706(1) of the Administrative
Procedures Act (APA). Failure to
meet regulatory deadline found to
be unreasonable delay/agency
action unlawfully withheld.
N/A
None
7/26/2021
Physicians for
Social
Responsibility,
et al. v. EPA
U.S.
District
Court for
the District
of
Columbia
l:17-cv-
02742
Judge
Trevor N.
McFadden
$126,916
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Earthjustice
Plaintiffs' claimed that the
Administrator's October 31, 2017
Directive banning EPA grant
recipients from serving on EPA
advisory committees is arbitrary
and capricious and violates
uniform federal ethics
requirements issued by the Office
of Government Ethics, FACA,
and EPA statutes defining
membership requirements on
EPA federal advisory committees.
Directive: (1) is reviewable under
the APA because FACA's
implementing regulations provide
N/A
None
7
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).
8	In prior reports, EPA included the hourly rates used in the plaintiffs' fee requests. However, EPA has concluded that it is not accurate to link rates from initial fee applications to the lump-sum
amounts when final EAJA fees are the result of negotiated settlements (as is the case with all of the entries in this spreadsheet). In those situations, it is not possible to determine the hourly rates
implicated in the final EAJA payments.
1069

-------
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
Attorney8
Hourly
Rate of
Expert
Witness









law to apply; (2) is not contrary to
law merely because it differs from
the OGE uniform federal ethics
regulations; (3) is arbitrary and
capricious because it did not
provide a reasoned explanation
for EPA's change in policy; and
(4) is a supplemental agency
ethics regulation and therefore
should have undergone the
supplementation process outlined
in the OGE regulations.


8/30/2021
Sierra Club v.
Pirzadeh
United
States
District
Court,
Western
District of
Washington
2:ll-cv-
01759
Judge
Barbara J.
Rothstein
$89,950
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Sierra Club
and Center
for
Environme
ntal Law
and Policy
Alleging arbitrary and capricious
action in consideration of whether
"constructive submission" had
occurred with respect to a TMDL
for PCBs in the Spokane River.
Matter remanded to EPA with
instructions to develop a plan and
schedule for development of a
TMDL.
N/A
None
7/30/2021
San Francisco
Baykeeper, et
al. v. EPA, et
al.
U.S.
District
Court for
the
Northern
District of
California
3:19-cv-
05941
Judge
William H.
Alsup
$416,913
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Cotchett,
Pitre &
McCarthy,
LLP
Plaintiffs challenged EPA's
special-case Clean Water Act
jurisdictional determination dated
March 1, 2019, for the Redwood
City Salt Plant site as arbitrary,
capricious, or contrary to law
under the Administrative
Procedure Act. Plaintiffs brought
a single claim for relief,
challenging EPA's negative
jurisdictional determination under
the Clean Water Act for the
Redwood City salt ponds and
asking this Court to vacate and set
aside that decision. The district
Court granted Plaintiffs' motion
for summary judgment on that
claim and denied EPA and
intervenors' motion. In ruling for
Plaintiffs, this Court held that
EPA had erroneously applied the
N/A
None
1070

-------
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
Attorney8
Hourly
Rate of
Expert
Witness









law and vacated and remanded the
jurisdictional determination.


7/30/2021
San Francisco
Baykeeper, et
al. v. EPA, et
al.
U.S.
District
Court for
the
Northern
District of
California
3:19-cv-
05941
Judge
William H.
Alsup
$214,980
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Earthrise
Law Center
Plaintiffs challenged EPA's
special-case Clean Water Act
jurisdictional determination dated
March 1, 2019, for the Redwood
City Salt Plant site as arbitrary,
capricious, or contrary to law
under the Administrative
Procedure Act. Plaintiffs brought
a single claim for relief,
challenging EPA's negative
jurisdictional determination under
the Clean Water Act for the
Redwood City salt ponds and
asking this Court to vacate and set
aside that decision. The district
Court granted Plaintiffs' motion
for summary judgment on that
claim and denied EPA and
intervenors' motion. In ruling for
Plaintiffs, this Court held that
EPA had erroneously applied the
law and vacated and remanded the
jurisdictional determination.
N/A
None
7/30/2021
San Francisco
Baykeeper, et
al. v. EPA, et
al.
U.S.
District
Court for
the
Northern
District of
California
3:19-cv-
05941
Judge
William H.
Alsup
$64,400
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
San
Francisco
Baykeeper
Plaintiffs challenged EPA's
special-case Clean Water Act
jurisdictional determination dated
March 1, 2019, for the Redwood
City Salt Plant site as arbitrary,
capricious, or contrary to law
under the Administrative
Procedure Act. Plaintiffs brought
a single claim for relief,
challenging EPA's negative
jurisdictional determination under
the Clean Water Act for the
Redwood City salt ponds and
asking this Court to vacate and set
aside that decision. The district
Court granted Plaintiffs' motion
for summary judgment on that
claim and denied EPA and
N/A
None
1071

-------
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
Attorney8
Hourly
Rate of
Expert
Witness









intervenors' motion. In ruling for
Plaintiffs, this Court held that
EPA had erroneously applied the
law and vacated and remanded the
jurisdictional determination.


2/24/2021
Friends of
Animals v.
Pruitt, etal.
U.S.
District
Court for
the District
of Oregon
Pendleton
Division
2:17-cv-
01410
Magistrate
Judge
Patricia
Sullivan
$87,000
EPA
Appropriations
Negotiated
Friends of
Animals
Plaintiffs challenged EPA's 2016
denial of their 2015 petition to
initiate special review for a horse
contraceptive pesticide product
(Zona-Stat-H), as arbitrary and
capricious. The court found that
EPA's petition denial was
arbitrary and capricious in that it
did not adequately respond to
Plaintiffs allegations based on 40
CFR 154.7(a)(6), which permits
SR if the pesticide "[m]ay
otherwise pose a risk to humans
or to the environment which is of
sufficient magnitude to merit"
SR. The court also found it
impermissible for EPA to defer to
wild horse managers to determine
whether and when to use Zona-
Stat-H as a basis for considering
the criteria in 40 CFR 154.7(a)(6),
and remanded the case back to
EPA.
N/A
None
1072

-------
l-'Y 2023 Con^ivssioiiiil .1 usiilion I'slim;iled Resources ;iikI I I I'. I«ir l-'.n\imnmcnliil Justice I'mgrsim1
Dolliii' in 1 hoiisiinds
Appmprhilioii
Ac(i\i(ics
l-'Y 2023 ( .1
I'.sliiiiiilcd
Resources2
l-Y 2023 ( .1
l.sliuiiiled I I I.
EPM
HQ Environmental Justice (EJ) Program Management
and Coordination3
$101,537.0
92.3
EPM
EJSCREEN
$5,900.0
4.0
EPM
White House (WH) EJ Inter-Agency Council (formerly
EJ IWG) Support and EJ coordination with Other
Federal Agencies
$3,000.0
3.0
EPM
National EJ Advisory Council/WHEJ Advisory
Council Support, and Climate EJ Advisory Council
$4,000.0
5.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Competitive Grant Program4
$50,000.0
5.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Community Grant Program5
$25,000.0
3.0
EPM
Environmental Justice State Grant Program
$25,000.0
3.0
EPM
Tribal Environmental Justice Grant Program
$25,000.0
3.0
EPM
Community-based Participatory Research Grant
Program
$15,000.0
2.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Training Program
$10,000.0
3.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Clearinghouse
$5,000.0
3.0
EPM
Environmental Justice Legal Support
$4,000.0
3.0
EPM
Regional Outreach Centers
$10,000.0
12.0
EPM
Regional Resources for Environmental Justice Program
$11,501.0
65.1
Subtotal of EPM Environmental Justice Resources and FTE
$294,938.0
206.4
Superfund
Superfund Environmental Justice Program
Coordination
$5,876.0
5.5
Subtotal of Super/und Environmental Justice Resources and E'I'E

5.5
To(;il l-'Y 2023 ( .1 l.sliin;i(cd Resources ;nid I I I. Tor l.n\ inmincnliil
•Inslice Pro^mm
S3IHI.XI4.il
211.')
1 The Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 instructs EPA to provide "allocations
for each component of funding for environmental justice programs". Please see page 228:
https://www.eovinfo.eov/content/Dke/CREC-20 7CIlEC-2020-12-21-faoiise-bk4.pdf.
2Estimated program activity resources include both payroll and non-payroll resources.
3The former Agency Technical Assistance, Research, Training, Education, and Communication program activity has been
incorporated into the HQ Environmental Justice (EJ) Program Management and Coordination program activity.
4The Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Cooperative Agreements has been renamed as the Environmental
Justice Competitive Grant Program.
5The Environmental Justice Small Grants has been renamed as the Environmental Justice Community Grant Program.
1073

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

FY 2023 President's Budget
Pay ($l<) Non-Pay ($l<) Total ($l<) FTE
NPM Major Office
OA
Immediate Office
$7,687
$6,431
$14,118
46.5

Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
$8,174
$902
$9,076
44.2
Office of Public Affairs
$5,803
$322
$6,124
30.5
Office of Public Engagement
$1,201
$83
$1,284
8.0
Office of Policy
$29,121
$22,999
$52,120
160.1
Children's Health Protection
$2,678
$2,454
$5,131
13.1
Environmental Education
$970
$7,055
$8,024
5.2
Office of Civil Rights
$3,433
$473
$3,906
20.9
Executive Secretariat
$3,915
$149
$4,064
20.1
Executive Services
$3,041
$318
$3,359
14.9
Homeland Security
$2,546
$508
$3,054
12.3
Science Advisory Board
$3,294
$736
$4,030
18.7
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization
$2,027
$1,118
$3,145
9.7
Regional Resources
$46,658
$24,413
$71,071
259.9
OA TOTAL
$120,547
$67,960
$188,507
664.1



OEJ
Immediate Office
$476
$1,220
$1,696
1.0

Environmental Justice
$21,465
$264,137
$285,602
133.8
Civil Rights Compliance
$5,945
$2,100
$8,045
31.9
Regional Resources
$20,750
$2,144
$22,894
122.9
OEJ TOTAL
$48,636
$269,601
$318,237
289.6



OAR
Immediate Office
$10,878
$217,431
$228,309
57.7

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
$73,048
$176,467
$249,516
411.0
Office of Atmospheric Programs
$49,562
$119,058
$168,620
272.4
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
$72,380
$236,951
$309,331
380.3
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
$35,469
$22,260
$57,729
195.4
Regional Resources
$118,163
$195,783
$313,946
676.4
OAR TOTAL
$359,501
$967,951
$1,327,452
1,993.2



OCFO
Immediate Office
$2,041
$5,026
$7,067
11.0

Office of Budget
$7,884
$2,526
$10,410
43.0
Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability
$4,638
$295
$4,933
25.5
Office of Technology Solutions
$9,350
$25,209
$34,559
50.5
Office of Resource and Information Management
$2,690
$5,254
$7,944
14.8
Office of the Controller
$25,471
$2,109
$27,580
135.4
OCFO eEnterprise
$1,211
$549
$1,761
5.0
Office of Continuous Improvement
$2,241
$451
$2,692
10.0
Regional Resources
$34,820
$2,267
$37,087
206.3
OCFO TOTAL
$90,346
$43,687
$134,033
501.5



OCSPP
Immediate Office
$2,402
$1,227
$3,628
12.0

Office of Pesticide Programs
$63,479
$26,576
$90,055
349.0
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
$82,893
$53,861
$136,754
495.5
Office of Program Support
$35,604
$3,271
$38,875
183.0
Regional Resources
$25,090
$44,868
$69,958
151.8
OCSPP TOTAL
$209,467
$129,803
$339,270
1,191.3



1074

-------

FY 2023 President's Budget
Pay ($l<) Non-Pay ($l<) Total ($l<) FTE
NPM Major Office
OECA
Immediate Office
$7,117
$2,957
$10,074
42.9

Office of Civil Enforcement
$27,271
$23,441
$50,713
131.2
Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and Training
$70,736
$10,698
$81,434
336.1
Office of Compliance
$22,897
$57,172
$80,069
120.2
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
$2,967
$1,257
$4,224
15.4
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement
$14,301
$23,139
$37,440
70.5
Regional Resources
$320,116
$58,576
$378,692
1,844.4
OECA TOTAL
$465,406
$177,240
$642,646
2,560.7



OGC
Immediate Office
$3,920
¦cn-
oo
$4,001
17.2

Air and Radiation Law Office
$11,769
$23
$11,792
48.0
Pesticides and Toxic Substances Law Office
$4,710
$16
$4,726
22.5
Solid Waste and Emergency Response Law Office
$5,438
$218
$5,656
23.0
Water Law Office
$5,889
$143
$6,032
24.0
Civil Rights - Title VI
$0
$0
$0
0.0
Other Legal Support
$20,317
$10,877
$31,194
93.5
Regional Resources
$35,166
$762
$35,928
159.9
OGC TOTAL
$87,209
$12,120
$99,329
388.1



OIG
Immediate Office
$836
$197
$1,033
5.0

Office of Chief of Staff
$2,640
$623
$3,263
16.0
Office of Counsel
$4,014
$948
$4,962
24.0
Office of Management
$6,874
$1,623
$8,497
41.0
Office of Audit
$21,271
$4,973
$26,243
113.0
Office of Evaluations
$9,514
$2,246
$11,760
43.0
Office of Investigations
$9,844
$2,324
$12,168
59.0
OIG TOTAL
$54,992
$12,935
$67,927
301.0



OITA
Immediate Office
$973
$142
$1,115
5.0

Office of International Affairs
$8,732
$5,930
$14,662
44.0
Office of Management and International Services
$2,494
$779
$3,273
12.8
American Indian Environmental Office
$3,741
$619
$4,360
19.3
Regional Resources
$13,421
$85,776
$99,197
78.6
OITA TOTAL
$29,361
$93,246
$122,607
159.7



OLEM
Immediate Office
$8,730
$5,181
$13,911
40.8

Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
$3,188
$7,405
$10,593
16.2
Office of Communication, Partnership, and Analysis
$2,538
$1,555
$4,093
13.8
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
$27,393
$116,276
$143,669
144.3
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
$27,085
$30,768
$57,853
147.0
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
$4,055
$3,175
$7,229
22.6
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization
$2,939
$13,215
$16,154
16.6
Office of Emergency Management
$14,301
$41,542
$55,842
72.8
Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains
$886
$0
$886
4.0
Regional Resources
$303,822
$704,320
$1,008,142
1,738.0
OLEM TOTAL
$394,937
$923,437
$1,318,374
2,216.1



1075

-------

FY 2023 President's Budget
Pay ($l<) Non-Pay ($l<) Total ($l<) FTE
NPM Major Office
OMS
Immediate Office
$15,797
$57,760
$73,558
89.6

Environmental Appeals Board
$3,375
$163
$3,538
15.0
Administrative Law Judges
$2,239
$161
$2,400
11.0
Office of Human Resources
$30,465
$9,240
$39,705
153.7
OARM - Research Triangle Park
$15,742
$27,324
$43,066
100.0
Office of Grants and Debarment
$15,948
$4,317
$20,265
87.0
OARM - Cincinnati
$10,960
$8,505
$19,464
70.0
Office of Administration
$21,878
$351,961
$373,840
97.5
Office of Acquisition Solutions
$43,926
$6,647
$50,573
248.1
Office of Enterprise Information Programs
$7,973
$7,867
$15,841
40.1
Office of Information Management
$11,543
$33,472
$45,015
58.7
Office of Digital Services & Technical Architecture
$4,437
$1,655
$6,093
23.0
Office of Customer Advocacy, Policy & Portfolio Management
$5,827
$2,076
$7,903
31.0
Office of Information Security & Privacy
$3,566
$27,955
$31,522
18.1
Office of Information Technology Operations
$2,036
$12,189
$14,225
9.7
Regional Resources
$91,785
$52,587
$144,372
508.3
OMS TOTAL
$287,499
$603,880
$891,379
1,560.8



ORD
ORD Headquarters
$45,922
$74,230
$120,152
256.2

Center for Computational Toxicology & Exposure
$46,701
$35,725
$82,425
261.6
Center for Environmental Measurements & Modeling
$70,850
$47,962
$118,811
394.9
Center for Public Health & Environmental Assessment
$71,944
$44,423
$116,367
397.5
Center for Environmental Solutions & Emergency
$46,251
$38,505
$84,756
259.5
Office of Science Advisor, Policy and Engagement
$13,016
$51,572
$64,588
72.6
Regional Resources
$34,904
$21,990
$56,894
209.5
ORD TOTAL
$329,587
$314,406
$643,993
1,851.8



OW
Immediate Office
$13,000
$11,839
$24,839
64.8

Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
$41,520
$234,418
$275,938
228.8
Office of Science and Technology
$25,002
$43,418
$68,421
127.6
Office of Wastewater Management
$38,724
$647,099
$685,823
213.6
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
$22,433
$63,286
$85,719
116.3
Regional Resources
$220,842
$4,425,505
$4,646,347
1,309.6
OW TOTAL
$361,522
$5,425,565
$5,787,087
2,060.7




Subtotal Agency Resources
$2,839,010
$9,041,831
$11,880,841
15,738.6

Less Rescission of Prior Year Funds
$0
$0
$0
0.0
Reimbursable FTE



465.5

Total Agency Resources
$2,839,010 $9,041,831 $11,880,841 16,204.1
1076

-------
EPA User Fee Programs
In FY 2023, EPA will have several user fee programs in operation. These user fee programs and
proposals are referenced below. EPA will continue to review 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 2023, 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.
1077

-------
•	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
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 14.9 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 201810 and collected $2.79 million in fee
revenue in FY 2019 from Section 5 submissions. In FY 2020, the Agency collected $3.09 million
in fee revenue from Section 5 submissions as well as $2.5 million from two Section 6 MRREs for
chemicals within the TSCA Work Plan (Di-isodecyl Phthalate [DIDP] and Diisononyl Phthalate
[DINP]). In FY 2021, the Agency collected $28.65 million: $3.35 million from Section 5, $24.05
million from 19 of the 20 Section 6 EPA-Initiated Risk Evaluations, and $1.25 million from one
Section 6 MRRE for a TSCA Work Plan chemical (Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane [D4]). (The
Agency invoiced $88.2 thousand for Section 4 Test Orders in FY 2020 and FY 2021, but did not
start receiving submissions until FY 2022.) Because nearly $17 million of the collections for the
19 Section 6 Risk Evaluations was not due to be paid until September 2, 2021, those funds were
not accessible to EPA until early FY 2022. EPA expects to collect approximately $5.0 million in
FY 2022 ($1.6 million from the remaining Section 6 EPA-Initiated Risk Evaluations invoices and
$3.4 million from Section 5 submissions and Section 4 Test Orders) and $4.65 million in FY 2023
($3.4 million in Section 5 submissions and Section 4 Test Orders and an additional amount from
one TSCA Section 6 Manufacturer-Requested Risk Evaluation at $1.25 million if the MRRE
request is granted), all subject to potential fee level changes. EPA will allocate FY 2021 Section 6
collections over the risk evaluation lifecycle (3-3.5 years). TSCA requires EPA to update the Fees
every three years.11 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, 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.
•	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
9	TSCA, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, Section 26(b)(1) and (4)
10	https://www.epa.gov/tsca-fees/fees-administration-toxic-substances-control-act
11	https://www.epa.gov/tsca-fees/fees-administration-toxic-substances-control-act
1078

-------
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 2023, EPA expects to collect approximately $23.7 million from
this fee program based upon a projection of the original rulemaking cost study adjusted for
inflation.
•	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 2023, EPA will continue to operate the e-Manifest system and the Agency anticipates
collecting and depositing approximately $26.6 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 2023 Budget requests authorization for the Administrator to collect and obligate fees
established in accordance with Title V, Subtitle C, Sections 5029 and 5030 of Public Law 113-
121, 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 2023, EPA
estimates that $10 million in WIFIA fees could be collected.
1079

-------
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 2023 request carries forward the proposed statutory
language from the FY 2022 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.
1080

-------
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)
2021
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,063.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,330.0
2023
020-99-99-99-99-0060-24
$1,380.0
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 2023. 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.
1081

-------
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2021
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
2023
020-99-99-99-99-3100-24
$225.0
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)
2021
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
$96.0
2022
020-00-01-01-04-1100-24
$96.0
2023
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
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)
2021
020-00-04-00-04-0160-24
$335.0
2022
020-00-04-00-04-0160-24
$347.0
2023
020-00-04-00-04-0160-24
$262.0
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
1082

-------
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)
2021
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$120.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-3200-24
$120.0
2023
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
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)
2021
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$68.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$69.0
2023
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.
1083

-------
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2021
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$0.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-1200-24
$66.0
2023
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
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 Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the DATA Act
of2014.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Service Fee
(in thousands)
2021
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
$720.0
2022
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
$720.0
2023
020-00-01-16-04-0230-24
$720.0
1084

-------
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)
2021
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$44.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$46.0
2023
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 Office of
Management and Budget and Department of Justice 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 requested to contribute to this effort.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2021
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$43.0
2022
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$37.0
2023
020-99-99-99-99-0090-24
$36.0
Federal Executive Boards
The Federal Executive Boards (FEBs) will be under a new governance and funding structure to re-
invigorate the roles and responsibilities of FEBs to advance the Administration's objectives to
strengthen the Federal workforce, as directed by OMB. A new Line of Business (LOB) will fund
FEBs, replacing the current model which relies on an ad hoc structure with EPA providing funding
for regional FEB staff.
Fiscal Year
Account Code
EPA Contribution
(in thousands)
2021
N/A
$0.0
2022
N/A
$0.0
2023
020-99-99-99-99-1300-24
$300.0
1085

-------
FY 2023 Administrator's Priorities
Funding for the Administrator's priorities are allocated by program project in the FY 2023
President's Budget with a total of $2,375 million in the Environmental and Programs 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 2023 President's Budget Funding for Administrator's Priorities


Dollars in
Appropriation
Program Project
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 Energv
$50
S&T
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
$50
Total

$2,500
1086

-------
FY 2023: Consolidations, Realignments, or Other Transfer of Resources
Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights Compliance as a National Program Manager
The FY 2022 President's Budget signaled the Administration's and EPA's intent to establish a
new National Program Manager (NPM) for Environmental Justice (EJ). EPA intends to bring
together the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) and the External Civil Rights Compliance
Office (ECRCO) through their reorganization into an NPM for EJ and External Civil Rights
Compliance.
Currently, OEJ is located within the Office of Policy within the Office of the Administrator, and
ECRCO is located within the Office of General Counsel. The proposed reorganization would
elevate EJ and external civil rights compliance to the national program level to bolster the
integration of EJ considerations and civil rights compliance across all EPA policies, programs, and
activities; support the efforts of regulatory partners to similarly integrate EJ and fully comply with
civil rights requirements; and enhance EPA's ability to meaningfully engage with and directly
support communities with EJ and civil rights concerns. This change would reflect and help to
bolster EPA efforts to fully achieve the many commitments in the FY 2022-2026 EPA Strategic
Plan, Goal 2, Take Decisive Action to Advance Environmental Justice and Civil Rights, which
similarly elevates EJ and external civil rights compliance priorities.
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 continue to work closely with the Office of Management and Budget
and Congress on the proposal.
Office of Mission Support
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 new requirements
associated with President Biden's Executive Orders on climate,12 supporting underserved
communities, and acquisition.13 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.
12	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/.
13	For additional information, please see: https://www.whiteliouse.gov/briefuig-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-
order-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-govemment/.
1087

-------
FY 2023 STAG Categorical Program Grants
Statutory Authority and Eligible Uses
	(Dollars in Thousands)	
(¦mill Tilli-
Sl;illllii|-\
Aiilluirilk-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
llli^il)k' I si-s
i \ 2021
.U'lu;il Diilkirs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2022
.\llllll;ili/.i'(l
(iiiiiinuin^
Kisii In lion
Dulhirs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2023
Pivsidi-nl's liud^i-l
Diilkll's (\IOOO)
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.
$42,229.8
$41,905.0
$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.
$7,953.6
$7,488.0
$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.
$5,042.9
$4,198.0
$7,000.0
1088

-------
(Irani Tilli-
Slallllor\
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
.Ulual l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiiiali/.i-d
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Dollars
(\IOOO)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
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 PM2.5
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).
$185,320.9
Section 105 grants
$175,270.0
Section 105 grants
$235,838.0
Section 105 grants
$639.0
Section 106 grants
Total:
$241,186.2
$639.0
Section 106 grants
Total:
$229,500.0
$700.0
Section 106 grants
Total:
$322,198.0
1089

-------
(Irani Tilli-
Slallllor\
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
.Ulual l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiiiali/.i-d
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Dollars
(\IOOO)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
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 the CAA and
associated program costs;
Supporting CAA training for
Federally- recognized Tribes.
$8,963.5
Section 103 grants
$9,415.0
Section 103 grants
$18,126.0
Section 103 grants
$4,000.0
Section 105 grants
Total:
$12,963.5
$4,000.0
Section 105 grants
Total:
$13,415.0
$5,000.0
Section 105 grants
Total:
$23,126.0
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.
$8,684.5
$7,795.0
$12,487.0
1090

-------
(Iniiil Tilli-
Sl;illll(i|-\
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
Ai'luiil l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiii;ili/.i'(l
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Diilliirs
(\I000)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
Diilhirs (\ 1000)
Multipurpose Grants
Annual
Appropriations
Acts; 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.
$14,297.2
$10,000.0
$10,200.0
Water Pollution
Control (Section 106)
FWPCA, as
amended, Section
106; TCAin
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.
$227,741.2
$230,000.0
$251,538.0
Nonpoint Source (NPS
- Section 319)
FWPCA, as
amended, Section
319(h); TCAin
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.
$180,138.7
$177,000.0
$188,999.0
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.
$10,110.8
$14,192.0
$15,079.0
1091

-------
(Irani Tilli-
Slallllorx
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
.Ulual l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiiiali/.i-d
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Diilliirs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
Dollars (\ 1000)






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.
$110,341.3
$112,000.0
$132,566.0
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.
$10,604.0
$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.
$10,862.8
$9,619.0
$9,811.0
Resource Recovery
and Hazardous Waste
Grants
Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as
amended by the
Resource
States, Tribes,
Intertribal Consortia
Develop and implement solid
and hazardous waste and
circular economy programs.
$110,759.6
$101,500.0
$108,247.0

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




$10,000.0
Post-consumer
materials
management or
recycling facilities
Total:
$118,247.0
1092

-------
(Iniiil Tilli-
Sl;i 1 lllii r\
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
Ai'luiil l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiii;ili/.i'(l
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Diilliirs
(\I000)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
Diilhirs (\ 1000)
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.
$46,752.4
$46,195.0
$46,954.0
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.
$1,475.0
$1,475.0
$1,505.0
1093

-------
(Irani Tilli-
Slallllor\
A ill In > ril ic-s
ki'iipii'iils
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
.Ulual l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiiiali/.i-d
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Dollars
(\I000)
i \ 2023
I'lvsidi-iil's liud^i-i
Dollars (\I000)






Pesticides Program
Implementation
FIFRA, Sections
23(a)(1); Federal
Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act
States, Tribes,
Intertribal Consortia
Implement the following
programs through grants to
States, Tribes, partners, and
supporters for implementation
$11,862.9
- States formula
$11,051.0
- States formula
$12,759.0
- States formula

(FFDCA); Food
Quality Protection
Act (FQPA);
Endangered
Species Act (ESA).

of pesticide programs,
including:
Certification and Training
(C&T); Worker Protection;
Endangered Species Protection
Program (ESPP) Field
Activities; Pesticides in Water;
and Tribal Programs.
$285.0
HQ Programs:
-	Tribal
-PREP
-	School IPM
$1,243.0
HQ Programs:
-	Tribal
-PREP
-	Pollinator
Protection
$1,268.0
HQ Programs:
-	Tribal
-PREP
-	Pollinator
Protection




Total: $12,147.9
Total: $12,294.0
Total: $14,027.0
1094

-------
(Irani Tilli-
Slallllor\
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
.Ulual l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiiiali/.i-d
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Dollars
(\IOOO)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
Dollars (\IOOO)
Lead
TSCA, Sections
401-412.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal Consortia
Aid states, territories, the
District of Columbia, and tribes
to develop and implement
authorized lead-based paint
abatement programs and
authorized Renovation, Repair,
and Painting (RRP) programs.
EPA directly implements these
programs in all areas of the
country that are not authorized
to do so, and will continue to
operate the Federal Lead-based
Paint Program Database (FLPP)
of trained and certified lead-
based paint professionals.
$13,864.3
404(g) State/
Tribal
Certification
$12,328.0
404(g) State/ Tribal
Certification
$22,653.0
404(g) State/ Tribal
Certification
$2,030.9
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$15,895.2
$1,947.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$14,275.0
$1,986.0
404(g) Direct
Implementation
Total:
$24,639.0
Toxic Substances
Compliance
Toxic Substances
Control Act
(TSCA) § 28(a)
and 404(g); TCA
in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Federally
Recognized Indian
Tribes, Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of the U.S.
Assist in developing,
maintaining, and 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.
$6,150.8
$4,760.0
$6,877.0
Pesticide Enforcement
FIFRA § 23(a)(1);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Federally
Recognized Indian
Tribes, Intertribal
Consortia, and
Territories of the U.S.
Assist with implementation of
cooperative pesticide
enforcement programs.
$24,321.1
$24,000.0
$25,580.0
1095

-------
(Iniiil Tilli-
Sl;illll(i|-\
A ill In > ril ic-s
r.lili.- ki'iipii'iiis
Mli^il>k' I si-s
i \ 2021
Ai'luiil l)olhi i s
(Mill 1(1)
i \ 2022
Amiii;ili/.i'(l
('niiiiiiiiiii^
Kcsii In linn
Diilliirs
(\IOOO)
i \ 2023
1'ivsiik-iil's liud^i-i
Diilhirs (\ 1000)
Pollution Prevention
Pollution
Prevention Act of
1990, Section
6605; TSCA
Section 10; FY
2000
Appropriations Act
(P.L. 106-74);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
States, Tribes,
Intertribal Consortia
Provides assistance to States and
State entities (i.e., colleges and
universities) and Federally-
recognized Tribes and intertribal
consortia to deliver pollution
prevention technical assistance
to small and medium-sized
businesses. A goal of the
program is to assist businesses
and industries with identifying
improved environmental
strategies and solutions for
reducing waste at the source.
$5,022.1
$4,630.0
$5,775.0
Tribal General
Assistance Program
Indian
Environmental
General Assistance
Program Act (42
U.S.C. § 4368(b);
TCA in annual
Appropriations
Acts.
Tribal Governments,
Intertribal Consortia
Plan and develop Tribal
environmental protection
programs.
$69,307.6
$66,250.0
$85,009.0
National
Environmental
Information Exchange
Network (NEIEN, aka
"the Exchange
Network")
Reorganization
Plan No. 3 of 1970,
84 Stat. 2086, as
amended by Pub.
L. 98-80, 97 Stat.
485 (codified at
Title 5, App.)
(EPA's organic
statute).
States, U.S.
Territories, Federally
Recognized Tribes
and Native Villages,
Interstate Agencies,
Tribal Consortia,
Other Agencies with
Related
Environmental
Information
Activities.
Helps States, U.S. Territories,
Tribes, and intertribal consortia
develop the information
management and technology
(IM/IT) capabilities they need to
participate in the Exchange
Network, to continue and
expand data-sharing programs,
and to improve access to
environmental information.
$9,865.5
$9,336.0
$15,000.0
1096

-------
Agency Response To Office Of Inspector General FY 2022 Key Management Challenges Report,
Issued November 12, 2021
Below is the Agency's response to the OIG's FY 2022 Key Management Challenges report,
which included issues related to the Environmental Protection Agency's mission to protect
human health and the environment. EPA agrees there are significant environmental and human
health challenges currently, including but not limited to tackling the climate crisis, taking
decisive action to advance environmental justice and civil rights, ensuring safety of chemicals,
and ensuring scientific integrity and science-based decision making. These and other priorities
are communicated in the FY 2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan, along with a detailed roadmap
for achieving our mission. The Agency has set a number of long-term performance goals in
the Strategic Plan and annual performance goals in the FY 2023 President's Budget that focus
on areas related to key management challenges. Please refer the FY 2023 Annual Performance
Plan table in President's Budget for those measures.
The Agency has taken actions in response to the detailed considerations raised in the IG audits
and is working to complete others. In addition, as mentioned in the management challenge
descriptions, EPA has requested appropriations in the FY 2023 President's Budget to assist
in expanding work in a number of these areas and other key priorities. The responses provide
a summary of the major topics. Further details are available in the referenced audit narratives
and Agency responses.
1. Mitigating the Causes and Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change
Summary of Challenge: The OIG believes that the EPA must take a leadership role in limiting
climate change and mitigating its effect on human health and the environment.
Agency Response: EPA is working to drive Greenhouse Gas emission reductions through an
integrated approach of regulations, partnerships, and technical assistance. EPA also is
working to strengthen the nation's adaptive capacity and resilience, with a particular focus on
advancing environmental justice. EPA will ensure its programs, policies, regulations,
enforcement activities, and operations consider current and future impacts of climate change
and how those impacts disproportionately affect certain communities. As directed in
Executive Order (E.O.) 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, EPA issued
a Policy Statement on Climate Change Adaptation in May 2021 and published its 2021
Climate Adaptation Action Plan in October 2021. In FY 2022, the agency will publish
program and regional office Implementation Plans, which will report progress to date and
identify actions needed to address the agency-wide priorities identified in the Climate
Adaptation Action Plan. Program and regional offices will engage with states, tribes,
territories, and local communities in developing their plans. As noted in the Climate
Adaptation Action Plan, the agency will need additional personnel and funding resources to
successfully implement many of the priority actions in the plan. This resource requirement
was included in the plan per instructions from CEQ and OMB.
Additional agency efforts include:
Office of Water established a management-level Water Climate Committee to develop
the National Water Program's Climate Adaptation plan. The office will oversee
implementation and track progress, consider climate actions across the office, and
1097

-------
work with co-regulators and partners to implement priority adaptation actions that
also may have co-benefits of climate mitigation.
Responsible Agency Official: Victoria Arroyo, EPA Senior Climate Adaptation Official;
Betsy Shaw, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation
2. Integrating and Leading Environmental Justice Across the Agency and
Government
Summary of Challenge: According to the OIG, as part of its effort to integrate environmental
justice across its programs, the EPA must address the environmental hazards and cumulative
risk facing at-risk communities and effectively communicate that risk to those communities.
Agency Response: The agency continues to address issues and concerns raised by EPA's OIG
regarding its integration of environmental justice and civil rights within EPA. This includes
leadership from the Office of Policy (OP) and Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) senior
representatives on EPA initiatives to implement President Biden's E.O. 13985 on Racial
Equality and E.O. 14008 on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, and
participation on inter-agency and intra-agency working groups. On April 7, 2021, EPA
Administrator Michael Regan issued an agency-wide memorandum, Our Commitment to
Environmental Justice, which clearly communicated his priority of centering EJ and civil
rights compliance throughout all EPA's activities. Administrator Regan's memorandum
contained specific instructions for EJ integration 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 October 2019 GAO
report, Environmental Justice: Federal Efforts Need Better Planning, Coordination, and
Methods to Assess Programs (GAO-19-543), are now largely guided through implementation
of E.O. 14008 and E.O. 13985 by the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
EPA is supporting and engaging the CEQ on providing government-wide leadership on those
recommendations. Also, EPA included Take Decisive Action to Advance Environmental
Justice and Civil Rights as a central goal of the FY 2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan. In the
Strategic Plan, Goal 2 makes several important commitments to furthering agency efforts.
This includes advancing the integration of EJ considerations across all EPA policies,
programs, and activities. Similarly, it includes advancing agency efforts to ensure compliance
with civil rights obligations within EPA's activities as well as the activities of recipients of
EPA funding. Administrator Regan made an important decision to place EPA's EJ and civil
rights compliance efforts side by side in recognition of their inextricable link and mutually
supportive goals. This includes the intent to bring together OEJ and the External Civil Rights
Compliance Office (ECRCO) in the new national program as signaled in the FY 2022
President's Budget. EPA has committed to strengthening Title VI enforcement and fully
utilizing its civil rights implementation and enforcement authority. EPA will issue clear civil
rights policy guidance to increase recipient's compliance with civil rights laws. Specific draft
commitments in Goal 2 advance the incorporation of EJ and civil rights compliance in
fundamental elements of EPA's mission achievement such as:
1098

-------
Formal agreements with states and tribal governments.
Significant EPA actions with EJ and civil rights implications.
Resources provided to communities to increase their capacity to meaningfully engage
with EPA programs.
Affirmative post-award compliance reviews targeting critical environmental, health
and quality of life impacts that adversely affect overburdened communities.
EPA program compliance with language and disability access requirements.
Direct implementation of EPA authorities in Indian country.
Transparent commitments to measure outcomes on the ground that are significant to
communities with EJ concerns, amongst other commitments.
It is important to note that EPA has tied together many key obj ectives and efforts to implement
E.O. 13985 and E.O. 14008 through specific commitments in Goal 2 of the FY 2022 -2026
EPA Strategic Plan to help reinforce and drive achievement of the equity and justice aims of
those orders.
Additionally, enforcement remains a top priority in the agency's work to implement EJ goals.
The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) has issued four directives to
enhance work in communities with EJ challenges across all enforcement programs:
Strengthening Enforcement in Communities with Environmental Justice Concerns
(April 30, 2021).
Strengthening Environmental Justice Through Criminal Enforcement (June 21,
2021).
Strengthening Environmental Justice Through Cleanup Enforcement Actions (July 1,
2021).
Using All Appropriate Injunctive Relief Tools in Civil Enforcement Settlements
(April 26, 2021).
Moreover, acknowledging the ongoing role of the Section 319 program in benefitting
communities via watershed projects and other actions, EPA issued a memo in September
2021 that strongly encourages actions in FY 2022 to assess and advance delivery of Non-
Point Source (NPS) benefits to disadvantaged communities. The September 2021 memo
commits EPA to take several actions in support of the goal to assess and advance delivery of
NPS benefits to disadvantaged communities, recognizing that this will be a shared learning
experience. This memo also commits to an ongoing dialogue with the NPS community as this
work goes forward.
Responsible Agency Official: Mathew Tejada, Director, Office of Environmental Justice;
Elise Packard, Deputy General Counsel for Operations, Office of General Counsel
3. Ensuring the Safe Use of Chemicals
Summary of Challenge: The OIG believes that the EPA must develop timely and accurate
chemical risk assessments to identify acceptable exposure levels for humans and the
environment.
Agency Response: This management challenge discusses implementation of chemical safety
standards under the pesticides program and the TSCA program. EPA has made significant
1099

-------
advancements to these programs. To improve the timeliness of endocrine disruptor risk
assessments, a new organizational structure was implemented to ensure management
accountability for the Endocrine Disruptor Screenim ru^rarn (EDSP) to better align with
pesticide regulatory activities and establish a procedure for communication and coordination
with relevant program offices with testing responsibilities. In compliance with Pesticide
Registration data requirements in ecological risk assessments, the agency developed a table
matrix for inclusion in new active ingredient environmental risk assessments that clearly
indicates how data requirements are addressed in support of new active ingredient registration
decisions, (completed in January 2022). In addition, the New Approach Methods (NAMs)
refer to any technology, methodology, approach, or combination that can provide information
on chemical hazard and risk assessment to avoid the use of animal testing. The white paper
and establishment of EDSP Policy Council, referenced above, are initial steps towards
developing a structure and process for making determinations on required testing.
To address concerns related to TSCA risk evaluation capacity needs, EPA has developed and
revised cost estimates for the development of risk evaluations, and developed phased planning
based on cost estimates. EPA also has identified and implemented best practices to maximize
effectiveness and engaged in internal planning efforts to determine the best distribution of
resources to meet required activities.
This management challenge also focuses on toxicity assessments, specifically EPA's IRIS
Program. EPA's IRIS Program made significant advances to the approaches used to
characterize the health hazards of chemicals found in the environment related to productivity
and timeliness. Additionally, EPA made advances in the practice of conducting hazard
identification, dose-response analysis, pharmacokinetic modeling, and the incorporation of
modern IT databases and artificial intelligence and machine learning tools to expedite the
review and evaluation of contaminants of concern. These advancements are documented in
the ORD Staff Handbook for Developing IRIS Assessments, released for external peer review
by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in FY 2021 and are illustrated in the more than
20 assessment products released to the public by the IRIS Program since 2016. In a prior NAS
workshop report. Progress Iowa nsforming the Integrated Risk Information System
Program: A 2018 Evaluation. EPA's IRIS Program was praised for changes made during the
past several years, as well as for the successful trajectory of the Program. To address the
priorities for assessing chemicals in the IRIS Program and maintaining a current IRIS
database, the agency implemented a formal nomination process that ensures the IRIS Program
prioritizes assessments of the highest priority identified by EPA program and regional offices,
given limited resources. EPA documented the results of the FY 2021 nomination process via
the June 2021 IRIS Program Outlook.
Responsible Agency Official: Tim Watkins, Acting Director, Center for Public Health &
Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development; Samantha Jones,
Associate Director, Center for Public Health & Environmental Assessment, Office of
Research and Development; Dr. Wayne Cascio, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Science, Office of Research and Development; Rick Keigwin, Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
1100

-------
4.	Safeguarding Scientific Integrity Principles
Summary of Challenge: According to the OIG, science-based decisions at the EPA must be
based on principles of scientific integrity to ensure that human health and the environment
are protected by using the best-available science.
Agency Response: As outlined in Administrator Regan's 2021 Mass Mailer to the agency,
"scientific integrity is a core value at EPA" and under his leadership EPA is working "to
ensure our science is of the highest quality and use it to inform our decision making." In the
FY2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan, the Cross-Agency Strategy Ensure Scientific Integrity and
Science-Based Decision Making will be implemented to "strengthen the policies and
procedures surrounding scientific integrity and the use of science and evidence to inform
Agency decision making." EPA's Scientific Integrity Policy (SIP) has been in effect since
February 2012 and is one of the strongest scientific integrity policies in the federal
government. The program will be further strengthened by updating the SIP to meet the Office
of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) requirements and through the creation of
implementation plans. EPA will advance a culture of scientific integrity that inspires public
trust in the Agency and ensures that EPA achieves its mission of protecting human health and
the environment. Additionally, the agency is on target to develop and implement procedures
to address allegations of compromised scientific integrity, including violations involving
high-profile issues or senior officials. Our efforts to enhance the Agency' s culture of scientific
integrity are supported by agencywide training and outreach activities that engage employees
on scientific integrity. The agency has plans in place to ensure scientific integrity's high
visibility through increased training and regular outreach.
Responsible Agency Official: Dr. Francesca Grifo, EPA Scientific Integrity Official, Office
of Research and Development; Wayne Cascio, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Science, Office of Research and Development
5.	Ensuring Information Technology and Systems Are Protected Against Cyberthreats
Summary of Challenge: The OIG believes that Information technology is a fundamental and
essential resource for the EPA to carry out its mission.
Agency Response: Combating cyber threats is a continuing challenge for all federal agencies
as evidenced by the recent release of the E.O. 14028, Improving the Nation's Cyber security.
EPA understands the prevalence and complexity of ever-growing cybersecurity threats and is
aware of the potential impacts to its mission if information assets are compromised. The
agency appreciates the Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) perspective on the
management challenge regarding enhancing information technology (IT) security to combat
cyber threats and employed concerted efforts to address the findings and recommendations
identified in audit reports highlighted in this management challenge including, but not limited
to the following:
-	Developed and implemented processes within the Office of Mission Support
operations to improve management and oversight of audits and corrective actions.
(Ref: N/A)
-	Developed agencywide Cybersecurity metrics that are tracked monthly and discussed
in senior leader Monthly Business Reviews. (Ref: 19-P-0158)
Implemented actions to ensure contractor operated managed systems are in
1101

-------
compliance with federal Cybersecurity requirements via system assessments,
corrective action monitoring and the development of training for contract officers and
contract officer representatives on their responsibilities for identifying contracts that
require Environmental Protection Agency Acquisition Guide (EPAAG) Section
39.1.2 tasks. (Ref:17-P-0344)
-	Documented CIO's role in information security through policy and procedures. (Ref:
SP 800-30)
-	Documented and implemented controls to validate plans of action and milestones for
vulnerability testing results. (Ref: 20-P-0120/19-208)
-	Established a process to periodically review security settings for the agency's
governance, risk management and compliance (GRC) tracking system to validate
whether they meet standards and implemented audit logging capabilities to capture
data changes and a log review process. (Ref: 19-P-0158)
Building upon the progress outlined above, EPA has made significant strides in strengthening
its Cybersecurity program. As evidenced in it's overall "Managing Risk" FISMA report
rating, EPA has achieved or exceeded many of the Federal Cybersecurity Framework metrics
via the implementation of automated Enterprise IT solutions and continuous monitoring
strategies, including but not limited to:
-	Deployed more than 18,000 agents on employee workstations to enable the DHS
Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) Software Asset Management
capability.
-	Deployed Privilege Access User Management tools to protect Systems Administrator
accounts resulting in the removal of numerous old privilege user accounts and the
vaulting and securing of approximately 800 privilege user accounts.
Implemented Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Tools to protect against
malware and advanced threats by automatically detecting, alerting, and providing
threat insights and remediation recommendations on EPA endpoints.
-	Enhanced incident response capabilities by deploying a scalable Next Generation
Security Incident and Event Management (SIEM) System.
Among a number of additional priorities, EPA is working on the E.O. 14028 tasks such as:
Implementing Multifactor Authentication and Encryption, Zero Trust Architecture,
and integration with cloud security technologies.
-	Updating its Cybersecurity policies and procedures, streamlining, and strengthening
its security training program for users with significant responsibilities.
-	Deploying Enterprise IT security tools and solutions to protect the IT operating
environment.
With respect to the agency's water systems cybersecurity program, which also is discussed
as part of this management challenge, EPA is implementing a set of actions to improve
security at facilities nationwide. Agency efforts include:
EPA will continue working with each state, territory, and tribe to develop and train a
cadre of technical assistance providers who can work directly with individual water
systems to assess and enhance their cybersecurity practices.
EPA is pursuing regulatory and statutory options in the near-term for addressing
cybersecurity in the water sector.
In Q4 FY 2022 or early Q1 FY 2023 EPA intends to publish guidance for public water
systems and states elucidating the cybersecurity practices that can deter cyberattacks.
1102

-------
Afterwards, the agency plans to develop a nationwide training effort for all states and
all public water systems on assessing and implementing effective cybersecurity
practices.
EPA intends to work in close coordination with DHS in the development of the sector-
specific critical infrastructure cybersecurity performance goals, aligning them with
the cybersecurity guidance for water systems and states.
Responsible Agency Official: Tonya Manning, Acting Director, Office of Information
Security & Privacy, Office of Mission Support; Benita Best-Wong, Deputy Assistant
Administrator, Office of Water
6. Managing Infrastructure Funding and Business Operations
Summary of Challenge: The EPA must effectively oversee the funding and operation of
America's water, wastewater, and other environmental infrastructure.
Agency Response: The OIG identified managing infrastructure funding and business
operations as a top management challenge for the agency. To provide effective oversight for
programs potentially receiving infrastructure funding, the agency is engaged in an intensive
review and planning effort for programs that are slated for support. Led by the Senior Advisor
to the Deputy Administrator assigned to the infrastructure implementation, plans include
strategic and tactical steps for rapid and well-coordinated implementation. Operating models
identify critical program components and objectives, establish an implementation structure,
and engage stakeholders. A separate set of training, technical assistance, and internal control
plans are being developed by the mission support offices to ensure that funds directed toward
infrastructure improvements through the use of grants, loans, and contracts are utilized as
intended. EPA acknowledges that the increase in funding will require appropriate oversight
and is committed to safeguarding its resources against waste, fraud, abuse, and
mismanagement. Additional agency efforts include:
Working across the agency on a 30, 60, 90-day implementation plan for the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Bill, including an assessment of staffing, administrative, and internal
control needs.
Holding numerous strategic planning sessions between senior leadership and EPA
program offices with infrastructure implementation responsibilities to effectively plan
for the influx of infrastructure resources.
Holding meetings to discuss utilizing the most effective acquisition and grant
approaches to achieve environmental results and identifying the appropriate human
resources needs and hiring strategies to support a diverse and inclusive workforce.
Conducting annual reviews of state programs for Clean Water and Drinking Water
State Revolving Funds (SRF) through an array of activities. This includes providing
regional and state SRF support and training, performing analyses, and reporting
information in support of fiduciary and programmatic oversight.
Monitoring all executed loans in its WIFIA portfolio to assess changes in credit risk,
monitor project construction, and verify that borrowers are abiding by the credit
agreement laws and regulation through final loan repayment (approximately 40
years).
Establishing an internal working group to focus on the planning and oversight of the
infrastructure implementation.
1103

-------
Responsible Agency Official: Zealan Hoover, Senior Advisor to the Deputy Administrator;
Lynnann Hitchens, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Mission
Support; Faisal Amin, Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief Financial Officer
7. Enforcing Environmental Laws and Regulations
Summary of Challenge: Through enforcement, the EPA ensures that regulated entities are
following environmental laws and will continue to do so, as enforcement actions effectively
deter future noncompliance.
Agency Response: EPA recognizes enforcement as a critical part of the agency's mission and
maintains a strong enforcement program. Under the current Administration, EPA has
increased its focus on traditional civil and criminal enforcement tools, with particular
attention on environmental and public health threats to overburdened communities. This
includes identifying strategies and actions to make environmental justice considerations a part
of all aspects of the agency's enforcement program. In furtherance of the Administration's
priorities, the agency has rescinded several policies that, in part, were responsible for a
number of the concerns identified by the OIG. The agency put in place new policies that
reflect the current Administration's emphasis on strong enforcement. With respect to the
OIG's discussion of its recent reports (Report Number: 21-P-0132 - Resource Constraints,
Leadership Decisions, and Workforce Culture Led to a Decline in Federal Enforcement and
Report Number: 21-P-0131- Staffing Constraints, Safety and Health Concerns at EPA's
National Enforcement Investigations Center May Compromise Ability to Achieve Mission),
the agency remains actively engaged with the OIG in developing corrective actions that will
respond to concerns raised in the reports. EPA's OECA looks forward to working with
colleagues across the agency, as well as state and tribal partners, stakeholders, and the OIG
in addressing issues presented in the FY 2022 Key Management Challenges Report.
Responsible Agency Official: Mark Badalamente, Director, Office of Administration and
Policy
1104

-------
Office of Enforcement Compliance Assurance (OECA) Travel by Program Project FY 2017 FY 2023
Dollars in Thousands

FY 2017
FY 2018
FY 2019
FY 2020
FY 2021
FY 2022
FY 2023
Appr,
Program Project
En acted
Actuals*
Enacted
Actuals*
Enacted
Actuals*
Enacted
Actuals*
Enacted
Actuals*
ACR
PresBud**
EPM













43 - Brownfields
116.0
43.6
$16.0
$10.4
$16,0
44.2
416,0
41S.2
43,0
40.0
416.0
$3.0
44 - Civil Enfoicement
42.148.0
41.882,4
42.148,0
$1,860,9
42.216.0
41.942.2
42.197.0
4886.2
$742.0
4602.4
42.19-0
4889.0
50 - Compliance Monitoring
41.524.0
41.338,5
41.524.0
$1,498,3
41.529.0
41.397,2
41.516.0
4694.8
4567,0
4301.0
41.516.0
45 ~ 0
52 - Criminal Enforcement
41.522.0
41.33T3
41.522.0
41.385.7
$1,522.0
$1,458.1
41.522.0
4748.4
4548,0
4462.9
41.522.0
4854.0
57 - Environmental Justice
4186,0
1209,3
4186,0
4103,7
40,0
45.3
40.0
40.0
40,0
40.0
40.0
40.0
63 - Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
420.0
Si 5.9
$20.0
417.0
$20.0
$24.0
$20.0
46.9
420,0
$8.9
$20.0
420.0
90 - NEPA Implementation
4505.0
4251,6
4505.0
4251.1
40.0
$"'0,5
40.0
40.0
40,0
$0.0
40.0
$0.0
F2 - Facilities Infra structure and Operations
4238.0
4643,7
4238.0
4503,4
4238.0
4234,5
4238.0
4204,4
484,0
4131.7
$238.0
$84.0
Total
S6,l».0
$5,682J
$6,159.0
$5,630.5
$5,541.0
$5,136.0
$5,509.0
$2,558.9
$1,9«4J
$1,506.90
$5,509.0
$2,427.0













SAT













62 - Forensics Support
$260.0
$144,8
$260.0
$157.8
$260.0
$193.1
$260.0
$115.0
$141.0
$88,3
$260,0
1147.0













LUST













44 - Civil Enforcement
$0,0
SOU

$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0,0
so.o
$0,0
SO.O













OIL













44 - Civil Enforcement
414.0
49,4
$14.0
$16,4
414.0
48.1
414.0
43.1
414,0
$6.6
$14.0
414.0
50 - Compliance Monitoring
40.0
40,0
40.0
$0,0
40.0
40,0
40.0
40,0
40.0
$0.0
$0.0
40.0
Total

S14.0
$9,4
S14.0
S16.4
$14.0
$8.1
$14.0
$3.1
$14,0
S6.6
S14.0
$14.0














SUPEKFUMD













50 - Compliance Monitoring
48.0
40,0
$8.0
40.0
48.0
40.0
48.0
40.0
40,0
40.0
40.0
$0.0
52 - Criminal Enforcement
4468.0
4216,8
$468.0
$237,4
$468.0
4236,7
4468.0
4125,8
4468.0
4398.7
$468.0
4468.0
62 - Forensics Support
450.0
436,4
450.0

450.0
432,9
450.0
417,2
450,0
447.5
450.0
$<0.0
C? - Superfiindi Enforcement
41.135.0
4904.9
41.135.0
$"!9S."!
41.145.0
4995."'
41.143.0
4445,0
41.143.0
4154.8
$1,143.0
$1,143.0
H2 - Super-fund; Federal Facilities Enf
4120,0
468.3
4120,0
$69.0
4120,0
$65.1
4120.0
481,7
4120.0
411.8
4120.0
$120.0
Total
$1,781,0
$1,226.4
$1,781.0
$1,130.6
SI,791.0
$1,330.4
$1,789.0
$669.7
$1,781.0
$612,8
$1,781,0
$1,781.0
Grand Total
$8,214,0
$7,062J»
$8,214.0
$6,935.3
S7,606.0
$6,667.6
$7,572.0
$3,346,7
$3,900.0
$2,214,6
$7,564,0
$4,349,0
~Actuals include final obligations of New Obligation Authority (NOA) and Carryover for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), Due to iie COVID-19 pandenac.
FY 2020 and FY 2021 actuals were lower than prior year travel budgets,
* 'EPA will re-evaluate travel as part of the Agency's FY 2023 Operating Plan activities in preparation for the FY 2023 Enacted Budget,
1105

-------
On-Site Inspections and Off-Site Compliance Monitoring Compliance Activities From
EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System14
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.
Fiscal Year
(FY)
On-Site Inspections
Off-Site Compliance
Monitoring Activities
(EPA has not set separate
targets for this category of
activities)
Total
Completed
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 actual
Target: not set**
Actual: 3,200
7,600
10,800




FY 2022
projection
Target: not set**
Actual: TBD

10,000
FY 2023
projection
Target: not set**
Actual: TBD

10,000
*In 2019, EPA 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 through FY 2023 due to travel restrictions and uncertainty
resulting from COVID-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 (and updated in November 2020). As a result, earlier data may
include mis-categorized activities. EPA's April 24, 2020 memorandum provided definitions
14 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: https://www.c0ngress.g0v/l 16/crpt/hrpt448/CRPT-l 16hrpt448.pdf. This
report fulfills this requirement.
1106

-------
for both on-site and off-site compliance monitoring activities, which will create more
consistency in each of the categories.
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, which should result
in numbers more reflective of actual 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 and is continuing in FY 2022. While on-site
inspection numbers dropped substantially during this time, 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 about 34,000 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(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 April 2020 and subsequent November 2020 guidances 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 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 2021.
1107

-------
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:
1 a) 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 categories are necessary.	
Number of
Physicians
Receiving PCAs by
Category (non-add)
Category of Physician
Position
Covered
by Agency
(mark "x"
if covered)
Basis for Category
Category I Clinical Position
X
EPA's Office of Research and Development
(ORD) clinical physicians oversee the medical
care of study subjects. These studies are
conducted on the health effects of a variety of
common environmental pollutants in many
different human subjects. Our primary emphasis
is on cardio-pulmonary responses, with recent
interest in behavioral responses. The Medical
Officer is responsible for the health and well-
being of research participants before, during, and
after research. Prior to research, the Medical
Officer is responsible for clinically evaluating
individuals. During research, they are responsible
for instituting preventative measures to ensure
that any procedure entails the least risk possible.
After the research, it is the Medical Officer's
responsibility to evaluate an individual's health to
determine any clinical changes.	
Category II Research
Position
n/a
1108

-------
Number of
Physicians
Receiving PCAs by
Category (non-add)
Category of Physician
Position
Covered
by Agency
(mark "x"
if covered)
Basis for Category
1
Category III Occupational
Health

EPA is establishing a medical staff within the
Office of Administration, Safety and
Sustainability Division that will serve as a focal
point for pandemic planning, occupational
medical surveillance, wellness, and will provide
medical consultative services supporting the
Agency's safety and health, disease
response/outbreak, fitness for duty, diver,
automated external defibrillator, emergency
response, nerve agent antidote, medical
countermeasures, lactation, maternal wellness,
and other national programs.

Category IV-A Disability
Evaluation

n/a
1
Category IV-B Health and
Medical Admin.
X
This position serves as the principal medical
officer and environmental health scientist for
EPA's ORD. The position is responsible for
providing leadership, direction, and technical
expertise in support of organizational-wide health
and environmental planning, policy development
and implementation, and oversight of scientific
initiatives and research efforts for ORD's
Assistant Administrator (AA) or their designee.
This includes:
Strategic Research Action Plan oversight;
prioritization of environmental health research;
and counsel and oversight on legislation,
regulations and health impact assessments related
to Executive Branch agencies on human health,
air quality, ecosystem services, toxics and risks,
environmental social sciences, and most notably,
COVID-19.
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Plan (continued)
2) 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.
1109

-------
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 Clinical Physician positions
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
n/a
1
Category III Occupational
Health
The value of the physicians' comparability allowance to EPA is
to be used as a recruitment and 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 IV-A Disability
Evaluation
n/a
1
Category IV-B Health and
Medical Admin.
The small population of EPA Health and Medical
Administrative Physician position(s) 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.
3) 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
n/a
1
Category III Occupational
Health
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 IV-A Disability
Evaluation
n/a
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.
4) 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
1110

-------
Physicians' Comparability Allowance (PCA) Worksheet
1)	Department and component:	
| Environmental Protection Agency
2)	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.
EPA continues to use the PCA to recruit qualified candidates to fill vacancies and to retain these employees.
Additionally, EPA will use the PCA in FY 2023 to recruit and retain a physician for the newly formed
national health and safety medical staff.	
3-4) Please complete the table below with details of the PCA agreement for the following
years:

PY 2021
CY 2022
BY* 2023

(Actual)
(Estimates)
(Estimates)
3a) Number of Physicians Receiving PCAs
3
4
4
3b) Number of Physicians with One-Year PCA Agreements
0
0
0
3c) Number of Physicians with Multi-Year PCA Agreements
3
4
4
4a) Average Annual PCA Physician Pay (without PCA
payment)
$188,100
$193,700
$199,500
4b) Average Annual PCA Payment
$19,300
$19,300
$19,300
*BY data will be approved during the BY Budget cycle. Please ensure eac
l 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.	
1111

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FY 2023 Annual Performance Plan and Congressional Justification
Program Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Science & Technology
n 2021 I iiiiil
WliiiiK
n 21122
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
n 2112.5
I'lV-illrlH'-
Uncivil
n 2023
I'lV-illrlll'-
Uncivi l \.
n 21122
Vmiii:ili/cd ( l\
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
$4,809
$7,057
$8,661
$87,233
$107,760
$6,793
$7,895
$7,154
$96,783
$118,625
$8,800
$10,169
$10,420
$152,209
$181,598
$2,007
$2,274
$3,266
$55,426
$62,973
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
$112
$1,645
$3,063
$296
$5,115
$157
$1,735
$3,096
$161
$5,149
$157
$2,224
$4,383
$173
$6,937
$0
$489
$1,287
$12
$1,788
Enforcement
Forensics Support
$11,761
$14,000
$15,532
$1,532
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$9,653
$21,877
$500
$32,031
$10,380
$24,852
$501
$35,733
$14,526
$25,890
$501
$40,917
$4,146
$1,038
$0
$5,184
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
$2,782
$3,072
$3,195
$123
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$65,093
$67,500
$68,912
$1,412
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
$2,431
$1,805
$645
$4,881
$2,803
$2,207
$876
$5,886
$2,917
$2,252
$984
$6,153
$114
$45
$108
$267
1112

-------
n 2023
I'lV-illrlll'-
I- ^ 2112.4	Uncivi l \.
n 21121 I iiiiil	n 21122	1'ivsiilnii's	n 21122
WliiuK	Viimiiili/ril ( l\	Uncivi l	Amiiiiili/ril ( l\
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
$76,733
$95,250
$132,924
$37,674
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
$92,719
$112,250
$119,286
$7,036
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$112,717
$133,000
$141,477
$8,477
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)
$35,251
$13,859
$18,509
$43,598
$37,482
$16,253
$21,406
$51,859
$42,355
$17,095
$22,542
$58,456
$4,873
$842
$1,136
$6,597
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
$75,966
$111,217
$89,518
$127,000
$98,093
$140,448
$8,575
$13,448
Ensure Safe Water (formerly Water: Human Health
Protection)**
Drinking Water Programs
$4,088
$4,364
$6,776
$2,412
Clean and Safe Water Technical Assistance Grants
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
$0
$7,500
$0
-$7,500
Total, Science & Technology
$626,895
$729,329
$864,155
$134,826
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
$12,920
$91,632
$19,317
$131,015
$4,805
$8,326
$268,013
$13,153
$97,000
$20,733
$138,020
$4,633
$8,711
$282,250
$23,523
$125,216
$41,617
$289,010
$26,607
$18,000
$523,973
$10,370
$28,216
$20,884
$150,990
$21,974
$9,289
$241,723
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Radiation: Protection
$2,224
$8,283
$3,136
$7,661
$5,004
$10,588
$1,868
$2,927
1113

-------
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
n 21121 I iiiiil
WliiuK
$2,703
$10,968
$24,178
n 21122
Viiniiiili/t'd ( K
$2,404
$11,750
$24,951
n 2112.5
I'lV^iilrlll'*
Uncivil
$3,004
$23,542
$42,138
n 2M23
I'lv-idrnl'-
Uncivi l \.
n 21122
Aniniiili/rd ( l\
$600
$11,792
$17,187
Brownfields
Brownfields
$22,136
$24,000
$36,842
$12,842
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$97,583
$102,500
$144,770
$42,270
Environmental Justice
Environmental Justice
$10,343
$11,838
$294,938
$283,100
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
$164,888
$49,588
$15,809
$230,285
$168,341
$51,275
$16,943
$236,559
$210,011
$61,411
$19,883
$291,305
$41,670
$10,136
$2,940
$54,746
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)
$77,876
$5,335
$14,996
$30,361
$0
$5,152
$1,579
$87,500
$20,000
$15,000
$30,400
$1,900
$5,500
$3,000
$90,568
$22,524
$20,000
$40,002
$1,932
$6,252
$3,024
$3,068
$2,524
$5,000
$9,602
$32
$752
$24
Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other
Great Lakes Restoration
Geographic Program: South Florida
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
$6,731
$306,380
$1,369
$6,718
$32,946
$482,712
$10,400
$330,000
$6,000
$8,922
$33,750
$541,972
$11,208
$340,111
$7,202
$12,004
$35,016
$578,635
$808
$10,111
$1,202
$3,082
$1,266
$36,663
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$3,893
$733
$4,915
$9,540
$4,145
$909
$4,959
$10,013
$4,650
$1,014
$5,139
$10,803
$505
$105
$180
$790
1114

-------
Information Exchange / Outreach
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
TRI / Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Executive Management and Operations
Environmental Education
Exchange Network
Small Minority Business Assistance
Small Business Ombudsman
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency
Coordination
Subtotal, Information Exchange / Outreach
n 21121 I iiiiil
WliiuK
$13,402
$12,689
$12,945
$48,837
$3,311
$13,713
$1,756
$1,250
$8,277
$116,181
n 21122
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
$13,736
$13,206
$12,902
$46,836
$8,580
$14,084
$1,680
$1,778
$6,173
$118,975
n 2112.5
I'lV-Hlrm'".
lillllgcl
$22,908
$13,675
$16,386
$63,256
$8,668
$14,413
$1,935
$2,183
$6,362
$149,786
n 2(12.5
I'lV-illrlll'-
Uncivi l \.
n 21122
Anmiiili/cil ( K
$9,172
$469
$3,484
$16,420
$88
$329
$255
$405
$189
$30,811
International Programs
US Mexico Border
International Sources of Pollution
Trade and Governance
Subtotal, International Programs
$2,818
$6,409
$5,894
$15,121
$2,837
$6,746
$5,292
$14,875
$3,275
$11,758
$6,187
$21,220
$438
$5,012
$895
$6,345
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
$6,765
$74,013
$80,777
$8,285
$82,715
$91,000
$23,739
$98,452
$122,191
$15,454
$15,737
$31,191
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
$9,614
$3,768
$533
$8,968
$55,700
$16,645
$466
$3,422
$13,850
$112,967
$9,475
$4,975
$864
$9,205
$49,595
$15,865
$638
$3,205
$12,421
$106,243
$40,912
$5,882
$1,175
$25,869
$76,855
$18,892
$4,923
$3,981
$16,247
$194,736
$31,437
$907
$311
$16,664
$27,260
$3,027
$4,285
$776
$3,826
$88,493
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
$71,528
$257,524
$30,623
$48,256
$76,718
$285,441
$32,247
$46,229
$89,154
$288,293
$40,017
$66,087
$12,436
$2,852
$7,770
$19,858
1115

-------
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
n 21121 I iiiiil
WliiuK
$27,294
$435,225
n 21122
Viiniiiili/t'd ( K
$25,430
$466,065
n 2112.5
I'lV^iilrlll'*
Uncivil
$33,040
$516,591
n 2M23
I'lv-idrnl'-
Uncivi l \.
n 21122
Anmiiili/cd ( K
$7,610
$50,526
Pesticides Licensing
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
$1,287
$58,124
$36,714
$6,034
$102,159
$1,546
$60,181
$39,543
$7,730
$109,000
$1,580
$62,726
$45,876
$7,979
$118,161
$34
$2,545
$6,333
$249
$9,161
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
$115
$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)
$33,921
$59,769
$8,404
$102,095
$38,453
$70,465
$9,982
$118,900
$39,820
$79,743
$10,444
$130,007
$1,367
$9,278
$462
$11,107
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disruptors
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
$5,209
$11,476
$72,643
$11,991
$101,318
$7,533
$12,558
$60,280
$13,129
$93,500
$7,614
$17,121
$124,243
$13,749
$162,727
$81
$4,563
$63,963
$620
$69,227
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
LUST/UST
$10,373
$11,250
$12,564
$1,314
Ensure Clean Water (formerly Water Quality
Protection)**
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
Wetlands
Subtotal, Ensure Clean Water
$29,496
$18,562
$48,058
$31,822
$19,300
$51,122
$32,184
$25,637
$57,821
$362
$6,337
$6,699
Ensure Safe Water (formerly Water: Human Health
Protection)**
Beach / Fish Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Subtotal, Ensure Safe Water
$1,146
$97,190
$98,335
$1,584
$106,903
$108,487
$1,827
$133,258
$135,085
$243
$26,355
$26,598
1116

-------
n 21121 I iiiiil
Vt-I iiiiK
n 21122
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
n 2023
I'lV-illrlll'-
I- ^ 2112.4	Uncivi l \.
I'lv-idrnl'^	M 21122
liudgrl	Amiiiiili/ril ( l\
Ensure Clean Water (formerly Water Quality
Protection)**
Marine Pollution
Surface Water Protection
Subtotal, Ensure Clean Water
$8,206
$197,137
$205,343
$9,468
$206,882
$216,350
$12,299
$239,688
$251,987
$2,831
$32,806
$35,637
Clean and Safe Water Technical Assistance Grants
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
Total, Environmental Programs & Management
$0
$2,572,857
$21,700
$2,761,550
$0
$3,796,280
-$21,700
$1,034,730
Inspector General
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
$38,174
$43,500
$55,865
$12,365
Total, Inspector General
$38,174
$43,500
$55,865
$12,365
Building and Facilities
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
$7,006
$6,676
$6,676
$0
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$36,071
$27,076
$73,894
$46,818
Total, Building and Facilities
$43,076
$33,752
$80,570
$46,818
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
$1,973
$1,985
$2,872
$887
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
$11,634
$11,586
$12,062
$476
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$1,778
$1,000
$1,015
$15
Environmental Justice
Environmental Justice
$681
$826
$5,876
$5,050
Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
$8,469
$7,647
$8,088
$441
1117

-------
Forensics Support
Superfund: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Subtotal, Enforcement
n 21121 I iiiiil
Vt-I iiiiK
$1,250
$164,461
$6,974
$181,153
n 21122
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
$1,145
$156,773
$7,424
$172,989
n 2112.5
l'iv>iilrlir>>
Uncivil
$1,263
$166,487
$9,863
$185,701
n 2M23
I'lV-illrlll'-
Uncivi l \.
n 21122
Allllllilli/rd ( l\
$118
$9,714
$2,439
$12,712
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$31,897
$845
$32,742
$33,020
$1,030
$34,050
$43,796
$1,530
$45,326
$10,776
$500
$11,276
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
$1,511
$1,328
$1,328
$0
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
$752
$20,984
$21,735
$659
$13,826
$14,485
$7,859
$16,904
$24,763
$7,200
$3,078
$10,278
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
$632
$1,161
$1,793
$832
$443
$1,275
$868
$461
$1,329
$36
$18
$54
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
$26,775
$81,976
$23,380
$7,200
$4,224
$143,554
$26,561
$68,727
$23,800
$6,202
$3,210
$128,500
$28,806
$71,219
$32,345
$8,476
$4,403
$145,249
$2,245
$2,492
$8,545
$2,274
$1,193
$16,749
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$13,458
$16,463
$16,927
$464
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Health and Environmental Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety for Sustainability
$3,654
$6,065
$9,719
$12,824
$0
$12,824
$4,896
$8,060
$12,956
-$7,928
$8,060
$132
Superfund Cleanup
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
$233,104
$190,000
$199,835
$9,835
1118

-------
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
n 21121 I iiiiil
WliiuK
$7,555
$24,264
$639,714
$904,636
n 21122
Vllllllilli/rll ( l\
$7,700
$21,800
$589,000
$808,500
n 202.5
I'lV-Hlrm'".
Uncivil
$8,056
$36,272
$454,601
$698,764
n 2023
I'lV-illrlll'-
Uncivi l \.
n 2022
Allllllilli/rd ( l\
$356
$14,472
-$134,399
$109,736
Total, Hazardous Substance Superfund
$1,326,363
$1,205,811
$1,154,168
$51,643
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$625
$620
$653
$33
Operations and Administration
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$343
$932
$245
$1,520
$416
$836
$132
$1,384
$448
$724
$132
$1,304
$32
-$112
$0
$80
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
LUST/UST
LUST Cooperative Agreements
LUST Prevention
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST)
$9,561
$55,438
$25,383
$90,382
$9,470
$55,040
$25,369
$89,879
$9,811
$55,040
$26,669
$91,520
$341
$0
$1,300
$1,641
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Total, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$303
$92,830
$320
$92,203
$337
$93,814
$17
$1,611
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Compliance
Compliance Monitoring
$132
$139
$2,146
$2,007
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
$2,532
$2,413
$2,538
$125
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
$15,160
$16,200
$20,503
$4,303
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$628
$682
$641
-$41
1119

-------
n 2ii2.<
I'lV-illrlll'-
I- ^ 2112.4	Uncivi l \.
n 21121 I iiiiil	n 21122	1'ivsiilnii's	n 21122
WliiuK	Viimiiili/ril ( l\	Uncivi l	Amiiiiili/ril ( l\
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs
$1,149
$19,601
$664
$20,098
$674
$26,502
$10
$6,404
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
Brownfields Projects
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Targeted Airshed Grants
San Juan Watershed Monitoring (formerly Gold King
Mine Water Monitoring)**
Safe Water for Small & Disadvantaged Communities
Reducing Lead in Drinking Water
Lead Testing in Schools
Drinking Water Infrastructure Resilience and
Sustainability
Technical Assistance for Wastewater Treatment Works
(formerly Technical Assistance for Treatment Works)**
Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Reuse Grants (formerly
Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Control Grants)**
Water Infrastructure Workforce Investment (formerly
Water Infrastructure and Workforce Investment)**
Technical Assistance and Grants for Emergencies
(SDWA)
Technical Assistance and Grants for Emergencies, Small
Systems
Source Water Petition Program
Voluntary Connections to Public Water Systems
Underserved Communities Grant to Meet SDWA
Requirements
Small System Water Loss Identification and Prevention
Midsize and Large Drinking Water System Infrastructure
Resilience and Sustainability
Indian Reservation Drinking Water Program
Advanced Drinking Water Technologies
$36,607
$101,296
$1,788,798
$1,224,269
$19,591
$87,360
$52,895
$6,363
$45,312
$40,053
$19,430
$0
$0
$6,308
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$36,186
$90,982
$1,638,826
$1,126,088
$30,000
$90,000
$59,000
$4,000
$26,408
$21,511
$26,500
$4,000
$18,000
$40,000
$3,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$40,000
$130,982
$1,638,847
$1,126,095
$30,000
$150,000
$59,000
$4,000
$80,002
$182,002
$36,500
$25,000
$18,000
$280,000
$17,711
$35,000
$15,000
$5,000
$20,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$10,000
$3,814
$40,000
$21
$7
$0
$60,000
$0
$0
$53,594
$160,491
$10,000
$21,000
$0
$240,000
$14,711
$35,000
$15,000
$5,000
$20,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$50,000
$10,000
1120

-------
Clean Water Act Research, Investigations, Training, and
Information
Wastewater Efficiency Grant Pilot Program
Clean Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability
Program
Small and Medium Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Circuit Rider Program
Grants for Low and Moderate income Household
Decentralized Wastewater Systems
Connection to Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Water Data Sharing Pilot Program
Stormwater Infrastructure Technology
Stormwater Control Infrastructure Project Grants
Alternative Water Sources Grants Pilot Program
Enhanced Aquifer Use and Recharge
Water Sector Cybersecurity
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
n 21121 1iiiiil
WliiuK
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$3,428,280
n 21122
Vnmiiili/cil ( K
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$3,214,501
n 2023
I'lV-Hlrm'".
Uncivil
$75,000
$20,000
$25,000
$10,000
$50,000
$40,000
$15,000
$5,000
$10,000
$25,000
$5,000
$25,000
$4,408,139
n 2023
I'lV-illrlll'-
Uncivi l \.
n 2022
Anmiiili/cil ( K
$75,000
$20,000
$25,000
$10,000
$50,000
$40,000
$15,000
$5,000
$10,000
$25,000
$5,000
$25,000
$1,193,638
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS)
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
Categorical Grant: Radon
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Monitoring Grants
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106) (other activities)
Subtotal, Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106)
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control
(UIC)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
Categorical Grant: Lead
Resource Recovery and Hazardous Waste Grants
(formerly Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance)* *
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
$180,139
$110,341
$241,186
$8,685
$15,458
$212,284
$227,741
$10,111
$10,604
$12,148
$15,895
$110,760
$24,321
$5,022
$6,151
$69,308
$1,475
$177,000
$112,000
$229,500
$7,795
$17,267
$212,733
$230,000
$14,192
$11,164
$12,294
$14,275
$101,500
$24,000
$4,630
$4,760
$66,250
$1,475
$188,999
$132,566
$322,198
$12,487
$18,515
$233,023
$251,538
$15,079
$11,387
$14,027
$24,639
$118,247
$25,580
$5,775
$6,877
$85,009
$1,505
$11,999
$20,566
$92,698
$4,692
$1,248
$20,290
$21,538
$887
$223
$1,733
$10,364
$16,747
$1,580
$1,145
$2,117
$18,759
$30
1121

-------

n 21121 1 iiiiil
WliiuK
n 2022
Viiniiiili/t'd ( K
n 2023
I'lV^iilrlll'*
Uncivil
n 2023
I'lv-idrnl'-
Uncivi l \.
n 2022
Anmiiili/cd ( K
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
$12,964
$13,415
$23,126
$9,711
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
$9,866
$9,336
$15,000
$5,664
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
$10,863
$9,619
$9,811
$192
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
$46,752
$46,195
$46,954
$759
Categorical Grant: Multipurpose Grants
$14,297
$10,000
$10,200
$200
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
$1,128,627
$1,099,400
$1,321,004
$221,604
Clean and Safe Water Technical Assistance Grants
(formerly Congressional Priorities)**




Water Quality Research and Support Grants
$365
$0
$0
$0
Total, State and Tribal Assistance Grants
$4,557,273
$4,313,901
$5,729,143
$1,415,242
Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund




Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)




RCRA: Waste Management
$21,498
$0
$0
$0
Operations and Administration




Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
$154
$0
$0
$0
Total, Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System
Fund
$21,652
$0
$0
$0
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Fund




Ensure Clean Water (formerly Water Quality
Protection)**




Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
$79,800
$65,000
$80,344
$15,344
Total, Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
Fund
$79,800
$65,000
$80,344
$15,344
Subtotal, EPA
$9,378,522
$9,265,144
$11,880,841
$2,615,697
Cancellation of Funds
$0
-$27,991
$0
$27,991
TOTAL, EPA	$9,378,522	$9,237,153	$11,880,841	$2,643,688
*For ease of comparison, Superfund transfer resources for the audit and research functions are shown in the Superfund account.
** These programs have proposed for name change in the FY 2023 President's Budget.
1122

-------
Eliminated Programs
Eliminated Program Projects
Water Quality Research and Support Grants
(FY 2023 President's Budget: $0.0, 0.0 FTE)
This program is proposed for elimination in the FY 2023 President's Budget. Work to advance
water quality protection can be accomplished within core statutory programs funded in the Budget
request. This 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 by Congress 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.
1123

-------
Proposed FY 2023 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 2023 Budget Request carries forward the proposed statutory language from the FY 2022
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 carrying forward of language specifying that PRIA fees collected in FY 2023 will remain
available until expended would simplify aspects of budget execution. The proposal to allow EPA
to collect and spend PRIA fees in FY 2023 and to authorize expanded use of PRIA fee collections
is below.
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 2023.
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;
1124

-------
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 2023, EPA will
operate the e-Manifest system and the Agency anticipates collecting and depositing approximately
$26.6 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 2023 will remain available until
expended would simplify aspects of budget execution.
Propose a modification to the 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 2023, to remain available until expended.
Change to Buildings and Facilities Per Project Threshold
The Building and Facilities threshold was last increased from $85,000 to $150,000 in FY 2013.
Since 2013, costs for construction, material, and labor have increased significantly. EPA is
proposing to reflect these cost increases by raising the per project threshold from $150,000 to
$350,000. The $350,000 threshold will apply to the S&T, EPM, OIG, Superfund, and LUST
appropriations and will allow the programs to proceed effectively and efficiently to address
immediate, urgent and smaller-scale facility improvements and will enable the Agency to maintain
adequate operations, further mission-critical activities and implement climate sustainability and
resiliency enhancements.
Propose a modification to the existing provision:
The Science and Technology, Environmental Programs and Management, Office of Inspector
General, Hazardous Substance Superfund, and Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund
Program Accounts, are available for the construction, alteration, repair, rehabilitation, and
renovation of facilities provided that the cost does not exceed $350,000 per project.
1125

-------
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 Rule15 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
2022 President's Budget. Language specifying that TSCA fees collected in FY 2023 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 26(b) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S. C. 2625(b)) for
fiscal year 2023, to remain available until expended.
Student Services Contracting Authority
In the FY 2023 Budget Request, 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 2023 Budget:
For fiscal years 2022 through 2027, 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.
15 For additional information, please refer to: https:/Avww.epa.gov/tsca-fees/fees-adiiiiiiistratioii-tox.ic-substaiices-coiitrol-act.
1126

-------
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 2023 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.
Proposed Language to add to FY 2023 Budget:
The appropriation provided by 42 U.S.C. 9622(b)(3) is available for the hire, maintenance, and
operation of aircraft.
Title 42 Hiring Authority
EPA is requesting the same language for its Title 42 Authority as proposed in the FY 2022
President's Budget. This would include a cap of 25 hires for OCSPP and 75 Hires for ORD. 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 2023 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) 16 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 2023 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
16 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): fattps: //www, congress, gov/1.1.5/plaws/publ91. /.FLAW -1.1.5publ91. .pelf.
1127

-------
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 2023 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
1128

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Plan for Implementing the Policies and Directives of Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is committed to honoring tribal sovereignty
and including tribal voices in policy deliberations, as called for in President Biden's January
26, 2021 memorandum on Nation-to-Nation relationships with American Indian and Alaska
Native Tribal Nations. EPA has a long history of engagement and consultation with tribal
governments. In 2011, it was among the first federal agencies to issue a tribal consultation
policy, and in the 10 years since the policy was issued, EPA has conducted more than 680 tribal
consultations. Implementation of EPA's consultation policy remains a top priority for the
Agency. EPA strives to learn from its past consultations and ongoing engagements with
federally recognized Indian tribes. This plan, which builds upon EPA's existing policies and
practices, identifies current and future actions the Agency is taking to meet the directives of
Executive Order 13175 and to build on and strengthen its consultation policies and practices.
1. Introduction
In his January 26, 2021 memorandum, Tribal Consultation andStrengtheningNation-to-Nation
Relationships. President Biden affirmed: (1) respect for tribal sovereignty and self-governance,
(2) commitment to fulfilling federal trust and treaty responsibilities to tribal nations, and (3)
regular, meaningful, and robust consultation with tribal nations as cornerstones of federal Indian
policy. The memorandum also reaffirmed both Executive Orde	nsultation and
Coordination with Indan Tribal Governments. which requires all federal agencies to engage in
regular and meaningful tribal consultation in formulating or implementing policies that have
tribal implications, and the November 2009 Presidential Memorandum on Tribal Consultation.
which requires each federal agency to implement the policies and directives of EO 13175.
The 2021 memorandum directs federal agencies to submit a detailed plan of actions that agencies
will take to implement the policies and directives of EO 13175, developed in consultation with
tribal nations and tribal officials, within 90 days of the date of the presidential memorandum
(April 26, 2021).
I. Consultation and Coordination Process for Developing EPA's Plan for
Implementing EO 13175
In accordance with this directive, EPA held a tribal consultation and coordination period from
March 1 - 31, 2021, to obtain tribal input on improving implementation of its consultation
policies and practices, pursuant to the policies and directives of EO 13175. EPA received 27
written comment letters from tribes and tribal organizations as part of the tribal consultation and
coordination process and one letter from the State of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian Affairs. During
the consultation and coordination period, EPA held two national tribal webinars and listening
sessions on March 15 and March 17, 2021, which were attended by more than 130 participants.
The webinars were held to discuss EPA's current consultation policies and practices, identify
future actions the Agency is developing to improve on its existing consultation work, and seek
input on opportunities to strengthen its consultation policies and practices moving forward.
1129

-------
Additionally, EPA staff briefed four EPA Tribal Partnership Groups and Regional Tribal
Operations Committees (RTOCs) during the consultation and coordination period, at the
groups' request, recording feedback provided by tribal representatives at those meetings.
When developing this Plan for Implementing the Policies and Directives of Executive Order
13175, EPA reviewed and carefully considered all comments and input provided during the
consultation and coordination process. Based on key comment themes that emerged from the
tribal input received, EPA is taking action to strengthen our consultation policies and practices
and the implementation of those policies and practices, as discussed below.
II. Actions to Strengthen EPA Consultation Policies and Practices
EPA has a number of policies and practices currently in place to implement EO 13175 and
provide for regular, meaningful consultation for Agency actions that may affect tribes. These
policies and practices are discussed in detail below in Section IV of this plan. EPA recognizes
that consultations are often complicated processes, and the Agency strives to learn from its past
consultations and ongoing engagements with tribes as it continues work to strengthen its
consultation practices. Building from the Agency's current policies and practices and based on
the feedback that EPA received during the consultation and coordination process, the Agency
will:
1) Convene an Agency workgroup to identify options and recommendations to
address key comments raised by tribes during the consultation and coordination
process. This Agency workgroup will be convened and managed by EPA's American
Indian Environmental Office and be comprised of headquarters and Regional office EPA
Tribal Consultation Advisors. EPA will continue to conduct outreach to and engage
tribes as it works to review and respond to the consultation input it received.
The workgroup will focus on addressing several key comment themes heard from tribes
in the consultation, including concerns that:
•	In general, EPA does not provide a sufficient amount of time for tribes to
meaningfully and effectively consult on Agency actions or adequate time to receive
consultation notification prior to the start of consultation meetings and/or listening
sessions.
•	EPA" s definition of consultation should be broadened, and additional requirements
should be put in place to ensure policies, rules, and decisions fully consider and
address the concerns of tribal nations.
•	Consultation often can feel like a "check the box" exercise, with a decision already
made by the time consultation occurs, and/or consultations can feel like an early
comment period opportunity and not a consultation opportunity.
•	Better coordination and communication are needed among multi-agency
consultation actions with improved tribal involvement.
•	Comprehensive training on tribal governments and their unique status (as distinct
from the status of states and local governments), the nation-to-nation relationship,
federal trust and treaty obligations, and appropriate consultation protocols is needed
for EPA staff and both senior and career leadership.
•	Improvements can be made to EPA's Tribal Consultation Opportunities
1130

-------
king System (TCOTS) website and email listserv to enhance Agency
outreach on consultation opportunities.
•	EPA decisionmakers do not consistently participate in consultation meetings.
•	EPA needs to strengthen its follow-up procedures with tribes after consultation.
Priority Action: EPA reinforces that it is critical to have appropriate senior leadership
involved in tribal consultation meetings. A focus area of EPA's workgroup will be to
recommend uniform criteria and practices across the Agency for identifying appropriate
senior EPA officials to attend tribal consultation meetings. This addresses a key comment
expressed by a number of tribes.
2) Provide enhanced consultation training for EPA Tribal Consultation Advisors. All
new EPA personnel receive a mandatory training entitled Working Effectively with Tribal
Governments. To supplement this training, EPA will develop and provide enhanced
training for Tribal Consultation Advisors to ensure they have the training and support
that they need to effectively implement the Agency's consultation policies and practices.
This training will allow Tribal Consultation Advisors to receive regular updates and an
opportunity to discuss best practices and lessons learned regarding the consultation and
coordination process. The training will be led by EPA's American Indian Environmental
Office.
I. Current Consultation Policies and Practices
EPA has a long history of engagement with tribal governments and is committed to respecting
tribal sovereignty and the nation-to-nation relationship in the consultation process. In 1984,
EPA was one of the first federal agencies to establish its own Indian Policy specifying how it
would interact with tribal governments and consider tribal interests in carrying out its programs
to protect human health and the environment. The EPA Policy for the Administration of
Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations (1984 Indian Policy) identifies nine basic
principles for implementing EPA's programs where they impact Indian reservations and tribal
interests. These principles include that EPA will work directly with tribal governments on a
"government-to-government" basis; that it will recognize tribal governments as the primary
parties for setting standards, making environmental policy decisions, and managing programs
for reservations, consistent with EPA standards and regulations; and in keeping with the federal
trust responsibility, will ensure that tribal concerns and interests are considered whenever EPA's
actions and/or decisions may affect tribes.
As described in this section, EPA's current consultation practices set forth in the EPA Policy
on Consultation aik; ; i ordination with India. _es (Consultation Policy) establish the
process for the Agency to identify actions or decisions appropriate for consultation, notify
appropriate tribes of the possibility to consult with EPA, and describe how the Agency will
receive and respond to consultation and coordination input. Among other actions, EPA has
established a system (i.e., Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System) to allow for
nationwide notification of consultation opportunities and has created internal reporting
measures to ensure that the Agency considers tribal input and emphasizes the importance of
tribal consultation. As described in the previous section, EPA will take action to review,
1131

-------
improve, and/or modify the implementation of our consultation and coordination practices
considering the extensive feedback received during the March 1 -31, 2021 consultation.
EPA's Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes
In response to the 2009 presidential memo requiring agencies to submit plans to implement EO
13175, in May 2011, EPA was among the first federal agencies to issue a tribal consultation
policy. The EPA Consultation Policy established national guidelines and institutional controls
for consultation across EPA. It was finalized after extensive consultation and coordination with
tribes and a public comment period. The goal of the Consultation Policy was to fully implement
EO 13175 as well as EPA's 1984 Indian Policy.
The Consultation Policy is designed to fulfill the Agency's obligation to consult with tribes in
accordance with EO 13175, but importantly establishes a broader standard regarding the type of
Agency actions and activities that may warrant consultation. The Consultation Policy describes
consultation as a process of meaningful communication and coordination between EPA and tribal
officials that begins prior to EPA taking actions or implementing decisions that "may affect
tribes." This broader standard is drawn from EPA's 1984 Indian Policy, which states that "tribal
concerns and interests are considered whenever EPA's actions and/or decisions may affect" tribes.
In addition to EPA's Consultation Policy, some of EPA regional and headquarters offices have
developed additional procedures to tailor and assist in implementation of the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes.
Four-Phase Consultation Process: The Consultation Policy outlines a four-phase
consultation process, that includes: identification, notification, input, and follow up.
•	Identification: During this phase, EPA identifies activities that may be appropriate
for consultation. To help identify, plan for, and coordinate EPA consultation actions
across the Agency, OITA's American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO)
conducts an internal semi- annual planning process whereby EPA headquarters and
regional offices are asked to review planned activities to determine whether
consultation may be appropriate and to report this information to AIEO. This semi-
annual reporting process is conducted to help maximize coordination of consultation
planning and execution among offices, affording additional lead time for preparation
and planning. Additionally, as outlined in EPA's Consultation Policy, in addition to
EPA's ability to determine what requires consultation, tribal officials have the ability
to request to consult on Agency actions.
•	Notification: During this phase, EPA notifies tribe(s) of activities that may be
appropriate for consultation. Per the 2011 Consultation Policy, notification should
occur sufficiently early in the process to allow for meaningful input by the tribe(s)
and can occur in a number of ways depending on the nature of the activity and the
number of tribes potentially affected. EPA notifies tribes of consultations through
several methods. EPA programs send official consultation notification letters to the
leadership of tribal governments that may be affected by a given action using the
contact information maintained in the Bureau of Indian Affair's Tribal Leaders
Directory,171 which a number of headquarters and regional offices verify and
17 Bureau oflndian Affair's Tribal Leaders Directory (https: //www.bia. go v/tribal-leaders-directorv \
1132

-------
supplement using information that they independently collect. Additionally, EPA
maintains a Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System (TCOTS) website.
which provides public access to current EPA consultation opportunities, with the
information needed for tribes to actively engage EPA on those actions. In addition
to accessing the TCOTS site directly, tribal representatives can sign up to receive
email updates every time the Agency announces a consultation opportunity.
Additionally, to assist the Agency in communicating with tribal environmental
programs, EPA maintains email lists for tribal environmental and natural resource
directors to assist EPA programs when communicating tribal consultation and
engagement information, and also distributes consultation information to relevant
EPA Tribal Partnership Groups and Regional Tribal Operations Committees, as
appropriate.
•	Input: During this phase, tribes provide input to EPA on the consultation matter.
While tribes always have the option and are encouraged to submit written
comments during the consultation and coordination process, as outlined in the
2011 Consultation Policy, this phase may include "a range of interactions
including written and oral communications including exchanges of information,
phone calls, meetings, and other appropriate interactions depending upon the
specific circumstances involved. EPA coordinates with tribal officials during this
phase to be responsive to their needs for information and to provide opportunities
to provide, receive, and discuss input."
•	Follow-up: During this phase, EPA provides feedback to the tribes(s) involved in
the consultation to explain how their input was considered in the final action. As
indicated in the 2011 Consultation Policy, "this feedback should be a formal, written
communication from a senior EPA official involved to the most senior tribal official
involved in the consultation." To help ensure that EPA is appropriately following up
with tribes on consultation actions and is tracking this information, beginning in FY
2020, AIEO began requiring headquarters and regional offices to document
consultation outcomes in order to administratively close out consultation records in
TCOTS. The information being tracked includes: (1) confirmation of tribal
participation; (2) confirmation of whether a tribe(s) submitted written input, and (3)
a summary of how EPA addressed tribal input. Since FY 2020, the Agency has had
monthly internal reporting metrics to track this follow-up phase of tribal consultation
and help ensure that headquarters and regional offices are documenting these
consultation outcomes in TCOTS.
Designated Consultation Roles & Responsibilities: To effectively implement EPA's
consultation policies and practices, the 2011 Consultation Policy designates consultation
roles and responsibilities for managers and staff across the Agency. Pursuant to EO
13175, EPA's Consultation Policy designates the EPA Assistant Administrator (AA) for
the Office of International and Tribal Affairs (OITA) as EPA's Designated Consultation
Official. EPA's Designated Consultation Official is responsible for coordinating and
implementing tribal consultation across EPA and certifying compliance with EO 13175
for applicable EPA activities, as discussed below. Additionally, per the 2021 presidential
memorandum, the Designated Consultation Official will coordinate implementation of
1133

-------
this plan for the Agency and, per the 2009 and 2021 presidential memoranda, has and
will continue to report annually to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the
implementation ofEO 13175.
EPA's Consultation Policy also designates key senior EPA management and staff to
oversee and help implement the Consultation Policy. The policy designates EPA Assistant
Administrators and Regional Administrators to oversee the consultation process in their
respective headquarters and regional offices. Additionally, the Consultation Policy
designates Tribal Consultation Advisors in each headquarters and regional office to assist
EPA programs in identifying matters appropriate for consultation and serve as points-of-
contact for EPA senior leadership and staff, tribal governments, and other parties
interested in the consultation process.
Tracking. Management, and Reporting of Consultation Actions
To help ensure consistent identification, tracking, and management of EPA consultation actions,
EPA follows a number of internal systems and protocols, as described below.
Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System & TCOTS-DASH: The Agency uses
its Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System (TCOTS) website to track and
manage current and past EPA consultation opportunities. To help improve tracking and
management of EPA consultation efforts and to better communicate consultation
information to senior leadership, AIEO also has developed a new, internal tool called
TCOTS-DASH. Using information entered by headquarters and regional offices into
TCOTS, TCOTS-DASH will provide real-time data to EPA leadership and staff on open
tribal consultation opportunities as well as long-term consultation trends over time.
Annual Reporting to OMB: Pursuant to the 2009 presidential memorandum, EPA submits
annual progress reports to OMB on the status of the consultation process and actions and
identifies any updates to EPA's Consultation Policy and its implementation. EPA will
continue to provide such annual reporting to OMB, as directed by the 2021 presidential
memorandum.
Consultation Documentation and Certification for EPA Regulatory Actions
Pursuant to EO 13175, if a regulatory action will have a "substantial direct[] effect on one or
more tribes," which is a narrower threshold than "may affect tribal interests" as applied under
EPA's Consultation Policy, each federal agency must certify to OMB that appropriate
consultation with tribes was conducted on the action in question and document a "tribal
summary impact statement" in its preamble to the rule (EO 13175, Sections 5(b)(2)(B) &
5(c)(2)). To comply with this directive, when EPA submits a draft final regulation to OMB for
review under EO 12866, the Agency includes a "tribal summary impact statement" as part of
the preamble to a rule. Additionally, under EO 13175, if an Agency action or decision is
determined to have "tribal implications," EPA is required to certify that the requirements of EO
13175 "have been met in a meaningful and timely manner" when transmitting the draft of the
final regulation to OMB for review (EO 13175, Section 7(a)). Prior to submitting relevant final
1134

-------
actions to OMB for review, EPA programs must obtain a memo from EPA's Designated
Consultation Office certifying compliance with EO 13175 consultation requirements.
EPA's Tribal Treaty Rights Guidance
As a supplement to EPA's Consultation Policy, in February 2016, EPA issued its Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes: Guidance for Discussing Tribal Treaty
Rights. EPA developed this guidance after nationwide tribal consultation. The guidance
complements EPA's Consultation Policy by providing affirmative steps for the Agency to take
during tribal consultations when an EPA action occurs in a specific geographic location and a
resource-based treaty right, or an environmental condition necessary to support the resource,
may be affected by EPA's action. Pursuant to the guidance, in such instances, EPA will seek
information and recommendations on tribal treaty rights and consider all relevant information
obtained to help ensure that EPA's actions do not conflict with treaty rights, and to help ensure
that EPA is fully informed when it seeks to implement its programs and to further protect treaty
rights and resources when it has discretion to do so.
EPA continuously strives to incorporating tribal treaty rights into their work. For example,
EPA's Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation issued a memo on the
Consideration al Treaty Rights a, v' v iitional Ecological Knowledge in the Superfund
Remedial Program in January 2017.
Conclusion
EPA would like to acknowledge the early commitment of the Biden Administration to regular,
meaningful, and robust consultation with tribal nations and to seeking information from federal
agencies on the steps they are taking to implement the policies and directives of EO 13175,
developed in consultation with tribal nations. EPA remains committed to consulting with tribes
and to holding meaningful communication and coordination between EPA and tribal officials
prior to EPA taking actions or implementing decisions that may affect tribes. EPA looks forward
to this opportunity to share its Plan for Implementing the Policies and Directives of Executive
Order 13175 with OMB and to work as an Agency to respond to and address tribal input to
improve EPA's implementation of its consultation policies and practices, pursuant to the
policies and directives of EO 13175. EPA is dedicated to strengthening our consultation policies
and procedures.
1135

-------
062S. 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 2023 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).
1136

-------
EPA OIG Open Recommendations and Corrective Actions
I V Audit
\ ii in he r
Rccoiiiiiiciulitlioiis iiihI Correct no Actions
Report
Dsitc
10-P00224-168
Recommendation: Develop a systematic approach to identify which
States have outdated or inconsistent MOAs, renegotiate and update
those MOAs 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 the EPA-State
MOAs. Ten authorized NPDES states were identified as being
problematic. EPA Regions and States have completed actions to update
MOAs to satisfy concerns identified in the corrective action plan for
three states: Iowa, Missouri, and Virginia. At this time, seven MOAs
are still in the process of being corrected. Planned: 9/30/22
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, 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
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 considering
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
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.
1137

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

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 several 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,
https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/epact.htm. This study is the
largest, most comprehensive, and most carefully designed and
implemented study to date on the impacts of fuel changes on 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

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 fiimigants.
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: 12/31/22
18-P00059-167
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.
12/22/17
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.
August 2021 Update: ORCR is in the process of upgrading the financial
assurance module (component) of the RCRAInfo system from its
current Version 5 to the new RCRAInfo Version 6 and thus has more
precise information about when the new financial assurance upgraded
1138

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

module will be available. ORCR has completed much of the workgroup
process for development of the RCRAInfo module. Additional needed
steps include coding and building the module, testing, and deployment.
These steps take several weeks to months to complete. OLEM is
proposing to complete Corrective Actions (5), (6), (7), and (8) by the
end of FY 2022, to take full advantage of the new financial assurance
data environment and incorporate that environment into its guidance
and training under the corrective actions. These dates had previously
been revised, and we are seeing considering this new more precise
information that further revised dates would be more accurate. The
OLEM Acting Assistant Administrator notified the OIG of the revised
date via email dated August 20, 2021. The OIG acknowledged the
revision via email on August 25, 2021. Planned: 6/30/22

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.
Corrective Action 6: Same as above. Planned: 6/30/22
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: Same as above. Planned: 6/30/22
Recommendation: Train staff on the procedures and instructions
developed for Recommendations 5 through 7.
Corrective Action 8: Same as above. Planned: 9/30/22
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 Agricultural Worker
Protection Standard on pesticide exposure incidents among target
populations.
2/15/18
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
1139

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto
18-P00233-360-
390
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.
COMPLETED - Complete prioritization list for funding by December
31,2021.
COMPLETED - Establish a funding allocation strategy for the
prioritized NAUM sites by December 31, 2021.
Complete final resource allocations by May 31, 2022. Planned: 5/31/22
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: 9/30/22
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: 3/31/22
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;
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.
9/15/18
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
1140

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

highlighting project successes and how EPA has used results of its
investment in citizen science. Planned: 11/21/22

19-P00002-168
Recommendation: Complete development of the probabilistic risk
assessment tool and screening tool for biosolids land application
scenarios.
11/15/18
Corrective Action #3: 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: 3/31/23
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 #4: 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
Recommendation: Publish guidance on the methods for the biosolids
pathogen alternatives 3 and 4.
Corrective Action #6: 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: 7/1/22
Recommendation: Issue updated and consistent guidance on biosolids
fecal coliform sampling practices.
Corrective Action #8: 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: 7/1/22
19-P00168-140
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.
6/3/19
1141

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

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: OTAO will continue to prioritize testing for all vehicle and
engine sectors, including the HD highway sector, as 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: OTAO 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: 9/30/22
•	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: 9/30/22
•	Lack of laboratory test cell and in-house testing capacity for heavy-
duty spark-ignition engines
Response: Heavv-dutv spark-ianition (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
1142

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

risk assessment. Planned Completion Date: 9/30/22. Planned
Completion Date: End of Q3 2021. Planned: 9/30/22

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.
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
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.
6/219/19
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: 12/31/22
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.
1143

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

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: 3/31/25

19-P00251-140
Recommendation: Assess the training needs of 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.

Corrective Action: OAR will implement the following corrective
action. OAR's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (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
19-P-00251-180
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan for improving the
consistency of stack test reviews across 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 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
19-P-00251-410
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan for improving the
consistency of stack test reviews across EPA regions and delegated
agencies.
7/30/19
Corrective Action: Region 10 agreed to conduct annual meetings with
its state and local agencies to discuss their stack testing oversight
activities. Region 10 committed to completing the first round of
meetings with its state and local agencies by March 31, 2020 and
committed to continuing those meetings through March 31, 2022. After
OECA and the OAR have completed the corrective actions for
Recommendations 1 and 3, Region 10 will meet with its state and local
agencies to discuss and implement any new stack test oversight policies
and guidance. Planned: 5/31/22
Recommendation: Develop and implement controls to assess delegated
agencies' stack testing oversight activities.
Corrective Action: R10 will implement controls to assess delegated
agencies stack testing oversight activities, after OECA & OAR actions
1144

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

are completed. RIO revised its completion date for this corrective action
to December 31, 2022, due to State (delegated agencies) unavailability,
as there are performing testing activities during the Spring. Planned:
12/31/22

Recommendation: Develop a communication plan to make all state and
local agencies within Region 10 aware of EPA requirements and
guidance for conducting stack testing oversight.
Corrective Action: Region 10 will communicate information from
OECA and OAR as it become available. Planned: 5/31/22
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.
Planned: 9/30/20
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.
Corrective Action: EPA will revise the State Implementation Guidance
per OIG's recommendation. Planned: 9/30/22
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
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
Recommendation: Develop and implement regional processes to
receive feedback directly from tribes using pesticide circuit riders.
1145

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

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

20-F00033-130
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer
establish accounting models to properly classify and record interest,
fines, penalties and fees.
11/19/19
Corrective Action: 3.0 - The 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: 3/31/22
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 - The 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: 3/31/22
Recommendation: We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer
establish accounting models to properly record receivables, collections
and earned revenue from federal versus nonfederal vendors.
Corrective Action: 5.0 - The 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: 3/31/22
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 - The 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: 3/31/22
20-P00065-451
Recommendation: Revise EPA Manual 3130 A2, Recognition Policy
and Procedures Manual, to establish a methodology for determining
the equivalent value for time-off awards.
12/30/19
Corrective Action 1: The Agency will revise its awards manual to
incorporate guidance for determining an appropriate time-off award
amount based upon the employee's efforts and accomplishments related
to the award nomination. We agree with the Office of Mission
Support's estimated completion date of October 31, 2022, for the
awards manual update. Planned: 10/31/22
Recommendation: Establish internal control procedures to manage
time-off awards as part of EPA resource management.
Corrective Action 3: The Agency plans to review time-off award use as
part of its on-site human capital accountability reviews of program and
regional human resources operations. These reviews have been delayed
due to restrictions related to the coronavirus pandemic. We therefore
1146

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

agree with the Office of Mission Support's revised estimated
completion date to review time-off award use by June 30, 2022. The
Office of Mission Support instituted additional internal controls to
manage time-off award use:
•	Time-off awards expire one year after effective date.
•	Time-off awards combined with high-dollar cash awards require a
higher-level review by program management.
•	Supervisors monitor time-off award balances using a leave earnings
and balance dashboard, which was developed in January 2021 by
EPA's payroll provider. Planned: 6/30/22

20-P00066-167
Recommendation: Maintain one official agency wide management and
tracking system for homeland security and emergency response
equipment that provides for the status, availability and acquisition costs
of all equipment.
1/3/20
Corrective Action: Establish AAMS as the agency wide system for
tracking personal property. Planned: 6/30/22
20-P00120-451
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:9/30/22
20-P00146-140
Recommendation: Implement a system that is accessible to both EPA
and the applicants to track the processing of all tribal-New-Source-
Review permits and key permit dates including application received,
application completed, draft permit issued, public comment period (if
applicable), and final permit issuance.
4/22/20
Corrective Action 1: OAR's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS) has already begun work on the Electronic Permit
System (EPS), which will include a module to receive and process
applications for the EPA-issued tribal new source review permits.
Specifically, this module will allow sources to submit electronic
applications for tribal minor NSR permits and then allow EPA staff to
process those applications in EPS. The system will allow EPA staff to
update the status of the application and permit to reflect when the
application is complete, the draft permit is issued, the beginning and
ending of the public comment period, and the issuance of the final
permit and response to public comments document. We anticipate
having a workable version of the EPA-issued permit module ready in
FY2021, Q2 and a finished product by the end of FY 2021.
Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: Establish and implement an oversight process to
verify that the regions update the permit tracking system on a periodic
basis with the correct and required information.
Corrective Action 2: Upon completion of the EPS, OAQPS will work
with the Regional offices to establish an oversight process to ensure
complete, consistent, and timely entry of data into the EPS.
1147

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

Planned: 3/31/22

Recommendation: Develop and implement a strategy to improve the
application process and permitting timeliness for tribal-New-Source-
Review permits, taking into consideration the findings and
recommendations from the Lean event. The strategy should include
procedures to measure results.
Corrective Action 3: As discussed during the LEAN Kaizen event,
OAQPS is currently working with the Regional offices on various
actions to improve the application process and permitting timelines for
all NSR permits, including tribal minor NSR permits. These actions
include: (1) standardizing the permitting procedures and application
forms used by the agency to streamline the permit application process,
and (2) tracking the effectiveness of the implementation of this and
other improvement actions identified at the LEAN event using permit
tracking flow boards and performance boards in every Region that
issues NSR permits. In addition, we also will draft an education and
communication strategy to reduce time-consuming back-and-forth
activity between the permit applicants and EPA during the application
process. Planned: 6/30/22
Recommendation: Provide guidance to the regions on how to accurately
determine and document the application completion date that should be
used for tracking the permitting process and assessing timeliness.
Corrective Action 4: OAQPS will meet with the Regional offices that
issue NSR permits to determine how they are currently determining
completeness of NSR permit applications. Based on this input, OAQPS
will then work with the Regions to standardize criteria to be used for
determining permit application complete date and its application to
permitting actions. Furthermore, OAQPS will periodically evaluate if
the Regions are implementing the criteria consistently.Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan, in consultation with
the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and the EPA
regions, to periodically coordinate with tribes to identify facilities that
are operating in Indian Country without the required tribal-New-
Source-Review permit.
Corrective Action 5: OAQPS will work with OECA, the Regional
offices and Tribes to develop a plan to identify facilities that may be
subject to this program. Planned: 9/30/22
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan, in consultation with
the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and the EPA
regions, to periodically conduct outreach to industry groups to educate
them on the tribal-New-Source-Review permit requirements for
facilities that are constructed or modified in Indian Country.
Corrective Action 6: OAQPS will work with OECA, the Regional
offices and Tribes to develop a plan to inform industry groups located
in Indian country about the tribal minor NSR permit requirements that
might be applicable to them. Planned: 9/30/22
20-P00173-1
Recommendation: Determine the extent and cause of the concerns
related to culture and "tone at the top," based on the indicators from the
5/20/20
1148

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

OIG's scientific integrity survey. Issue the results to all EPA staff and
make available to the public, including planned actions to address the
causes.


Corrective Action 1: We would first note that we cannot find the words
"tone at the top" being surveyed and find its use in quotes in this
recommendation unfortunate. EPA's Deputy Administrator, in
cooperation with EPA's Science Advisor, will work with the
Administrator to devise an action plan to address this recommendation.
EPA's Deputy Administrator, Science Advisor, Scientific Integrity
Committee will analyze the OIG scientific integrity survey, together
with previous surveys of EPA, EVS results, FMFIA reports and reports
of alleged violations of EPA's Scientific Integrity Policy to inform this
plan. Planned: 9/30/22

20-P00173-166
Recommendation: In coordination with the assistant administrator for
Mission Support, complete the development and implementation of the
electronic clearance system for scientific products across the Agency.
5/20/20

Corrective Action 6: OMS, ORD Office of Scientific Information
Management (OSIM), and the Scientific Integrity Committee will
coordinate to complete modification and Agency-wide implementation
of ORD's Scientific & Technical Information Clearance System
(STICS) to an agency-wide electronic clearance system for scientific
products across the Agency. The system will be consistent with the
Scientific Integrity Policy and our Best Practices document and with
the Agency's Plan to Increase Access to the Results of EPA-Funded
Scientific Research. Planned: 6/30/22


Recommendation: With the assistance of the Scientific Integrity
Committee, finalize and release the procedures for addressing and
resolving allegations of a violation of the Scientific Integrity Policy,
and incorporate the procedures into scientific integrity outreach and
training materials.


Corrective Action 7.1: The Agency will release the Procedures
document. It will be posted on the Agency's website
(https://www.epa.gov/osa/procedure-for-allegations).
Corrective Action 7.2: The Scl Program will create and release
appropriate outreach materials to ensure EPA employees and their
managers understand these procedures. Planned: 6/30/22


Recommendation: With the assistance of the Scientific Integrity
Committee, develop and implement a process specifically to address
and resolve allegations of Scientific Integrity Policy violations
involving high-profile issues or senior officials, and specify when this
process should be used.


Corrective Action 8: EPA will amend the procedures document
referenced in recommendation 7, to include a process to adjudicate
allegations of Scientific Integrity Policy violations involving high-
profile issues or senior officials in the Agency for which the Scientific
Integrity Official or Scientific Integrity Committee does not feel it can
adequately adjudicate via existing procedures and include an indicator
for when the process should be used. Planned: 6/30/22

1149

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto
20-P00200-451
Recommendation: Develop and implement a strategic plan and
objectives for the agencywide Quality System
6/22/20
Corrective Action 1: Develop and implement a strategic plan and
objectives for the agencywide Qualitv Svstem. Planned: 12/31/21
20-P00236-360
Recommendation: Assist the State of Arkansas in developing and
submitting a state plan to implement the 2016 municipal solid waste
landfill Emission Guidelines. If Arkansas does not submit a state plan,
implement the federal plan for the 2016 municipal solid waste landfill
Emission Guidelines once the federal plan is effective.
07/30/20
Corrective Action 3.3: Review and take action on Arkansas' submittal
once received. Planned: 6/30/22
Corrective Action 3.4: If no state plan or federal plan delegation request
is submitted, or until EPA approves Arkansas' submittal, implement the
federal plan forthe 2016 MSW landfills. Planned: 6/30/22
20-P00236-140
Recommendation: Develop and implement a process forthe periodic
review of municipal solid waste landfill design capacity information
and Title V permit lists to identify municipal solid waste landfills with
design capacities over the applicable threshold that have not applied for
a Title V permit.
07/30/20
Corrective Action 4.1: Anticipated for completion by 12/31/22.
Planned: 12/31/22
20-P00245-451
Recommendation: We recommend that the assistant administrator for
Mission Support evaluate EPA's Intergovernmental Personnel Act
Policy and Procedures Manual (IPA), including the checklist, to
determine whether the required documents, the consequences for
noncompliance, the responsible offices, and the individual roles and
responsibilities remain relevant and appropriate, and update the Manual
accordingly.
8/10/20
Corrective Action 1: The Office of Human Resources (OHR) will
evaluate EPA's IPA policy manual, checklists, required documents, the
consequences of noncompliance, responsible offices, and relevance of
individual roles and responsibilities. OHR will enter a final draft in the
Directives Clearance process. Planned: 4/15/22
Recommendation: We recommend that the assistant administrator for
Mission Support strengthen controls throughout EPA's
Intergovernmental Personnel Act assignment process to verify that
required documents are properly submitted and maintained as required
by EPA's Intergovernmental Personnel Act Policy and Procedures
Manual (IPA) and that the consequence for nonsubmittal of required
documents is enforced.
Corrective Action 2: OHR will strengthen controls throughout the IPA
assignment process to verify required documents are properly submitted
and maintained, as stated in EPA's IPA policy manual, and the
consequences for nonsubmittal of required documents are enforced.
Planned:4//15/22
Recommendation: We recommend that the assistant administrator for
Mission Support strengthen controls over the tracking of EPA
employees on Intergovernmental Personnel Act assignments.
1150

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

Corrective Action 3: OHR will strengthen controls over the tracking of
EPA employees on IPA assignments. Planned: 1/15/22

20-E00332-167
Recommendation: Ensure that guidance and planning address
deployment of on-scene coordinators in the event of large incidents
during pandemics, including overcoming travel restrictions to respond
to large incidents.
9/28/20
Corrective Action 3: OLEM plans, within 6 months of post-pandemic
return to normal operations, to conduct and issue an after-action report
to evaluate the effectiveness of EPA emergency response activities
during the pandemic which will include an evaluation of response
readiness with respect to travel restrictions. Planned: 6/30/22
20-E00333-1
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan to coordinate relevant
Agency program, regional, and administrative offices with the External
Civil Rights Compliance Office to develop guidance on permitting and
cumulative impacts related to Title VI.
9/28/20
Corrective Action: Anticipated for completion by 9/30/22. Planned:
9/30/22
20-E00333-162
Recommendation: Develop and implement a plan to complete
systematic compliance reviews to determine full compliance with the
Title VI program.
9/28/20
Corrective Action 2: Anticipated for completion by 9/30/22. Planned:
9/30/22
Recommendation: Verify that EPA funding applicants address potential
noncompliance with Title VI with a written agreement before the funds
are awarded.
Corrective Action 4: ECRCO will revise the 4700 review process (civil
rights form). Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: Determine how to use existing or new data to
identify and target funding recipients for proactive compliance reviews,
and develop or update policy, guidance, and standard operating
procedures for collecting and using those data.
Corrective Action 5: ECRCO will provide training to all staff in the 2nd
quarter on the 4700-4 revised process and will post technical assistance
video. With respect to other deliverables, ECRCO will conduct
training within 2 months of each deliverable. Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: Develop and deliver training for the deputy civil
rights officials and EPA regional staff that focuses on their respective
roles and responsibilities within EPA's Title VI program.
Corrective Action 6: OGC commits to developing and implementing
guidance on permitting and cumulative impacts related to Title VI. In
doing so, ECRCO will coordinate with the AO on the development and
implementation of its civil rights guidance and seek any appropriate AO
approval. Notably, ECRCO's efforts to strengthen civil rights
enforcement necessarily includes strengthening its relationship with
EPA's program and regional offices. Planned: 3/31/22
21-E00033-451
Recommendation: Develop and implement procedures that include
detailed requirements for planning and managing laboratory
consolidation efforts. Requirements should address developing master
12/7/20
1151

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

plans and programs of requirements, tracking and updating cost and
schedule estimates, and maintaining decisional documentation.

Corrective Action: We will continue to develop programs of
requirements documents per the requirements listed in EPA's National
Facilities Manual, Volume 2 and ensure all POR documents include an
overview of the project scope, objectives, requirements, performance
criteria, facility description and area requirements. We will ensure all
POR documents comply with the GAO cost estimating and assessment
guide. OMS will update the current cost and schedule tracking systems
and the current status of funds reporting process to include tracking
project cost accounting and schedule updates consistent with OMB's
Circular A123, as required. OMS will continue to report and document
consolidation decisions in the agency's annual Presidential budget
submission and the Federal Real Property Profile. Planned: 12/31/22
21-P00042-130
Recommendation: Adopt and implement policies and procedures on
military leave and pay requirements that comply with 5 U.S. C. §§5538,
6323, and 5519.
12/28/20
Corrective Action 1.2: The OCFO will determine what system changes
may be necessary to update PeoplePlus or make other changes in
support of internal controls, where feasible, to comply with any policies
and procedures related to military leave and pay policy. Planned:
4/30/22
Corrective Action 1.3: If changes are feasible and necessary, the OCFO
will develop a schedule for implementation. Planned: 4/30/22
Recommendation: Provide resources for supervisors, timekeepers, and
reservists on their roles and responsibilities related to military leave
under the law and Agency policies.
Corrective Action 2.2: The OCFO will provide PeoplePlus training to
support roles and responsibilities related to military leave and pay
policy. Planned: 4/30/22
Recommendation: Establish and implement internal controls that will
allow the Agency to monitor compliance with applicable laws, federal
guidance, and Agency policies, including periodic internal audits of all
military leave, to verify that (a) charges by reservists are correct and
supported and (b) appropriate reservist differential and military offset
payroll audit calculations are being requested and performed.
Corrective Action 3.2: The OCFO will work with the Interior Business
Center, EPA's payroll provider, to ensure the necessary timecard
corrections identified by the OMS periodic audit were made by the
employee and approved by the supervisor in accordance with agency
policy. The OCFO will provide a report to the OMS confirming
timecard corrections identified by the OMS periodic audit were made
by the employee and approved by the supervisor for the OMS to
distribute to the appropriate offices. Planned: 6/30/22
Recommendation: Require reservists to correct, and supervisors to
approve, military leave time charging errors in PeoplePlus that have
been identified during the audit or as part of the Agency's actions
related to Recommendations 5 and 6.
1152

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

Corrective Action 4.0: The OCFO will work with the agency's payroll
provider to confirm the necessary time charging errors identified in the
audit were corrected by the employee and approved by the supervisor;
and the OCFO will then provide a report to the OMS confirming the
necessary time charging errors identified in the audit were corrected by
the employee and approved by the supervisor for the OMS to distribute
to the appropriate offices. Planned: 3/31/22

Recommendation: Recover the approximately $11,000 in military pay
related to unsupported 5 U.S.C. § 6323(a) military leave charges unless
the Agency can obtain documentation to substantiate the validity of the
reservists' military leave.
Corrective Action 5.2: Where applicable, the OCFO will recover any
unsupported leave charges for out-of-service debt. Planned: 12/30/22
21-P00042-130
Recommendation: Submit documentation for the reservists' military
leave related to the approximately $118,000 charged under 5 U.S.C. §
6323(b) to EPA's payroll provider so that it may perform payroll audit
calculations and recover any military offsets that may be due.
12/28/20
Corrective Action 6.2: The OCFO will recover any unsupported leave
charges for out-of-service debt. Planned: 12/30/22
Recommendation: Identify the population of reservists who took unpaid
military leave pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 5538 and determine whether those
reservists are entitled to receive a reservist differential. Based on the
results of this determination, take appropriate steps to request that
EPA's payroll provider perform payroll audit calculations to identify
and pay the amounts that may be due to reservists.
Corrective Action 7.2: For amounts due to reservists who are no longer
EPA employees, the OCFO will coordinate with the IBC on the
amounts due. Planned: 8/29/22
Recommendation: For the time periods outside of the scope of our audit
(pre-January 2017 and post-June 2019), identify the population of
reservists who charged military leave under 5 U.S.C. § 6323(b) or
6323(c), and determine whether military offset was paid by the
reservists. If not, review reservists' military documentation to
determine whether payroll audit calculations are required. If required,
request that EPA's payroll provider perform payroll audit calculations
to identify and recover military offsets that may be due from the
reservists under 5 U.S.C. §§ 6323 and 5519.
Corrective Action 8.2: For any unsupported leave charges, The OMS
will coordinate with the IBC to initiate the process to recover any
military offsets. The OCFO will recover any unsupported leave charges
for out-of-service debt. Planned: 8/29/22
Recommendation: Report all amounts of improper payments resulting
from paid military leave for inclusion in the annual Agency Financial
Report, as required by the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019.
Corrective Action 9.0: The OCFO will report any paid military leave
amounts identified as an improper payment(s) within the annual
Agency Financial Report for the applicable fiscal year; and the OCFO
also will perform an internal control review on military leave pay
1153

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

during the FY 2021 A-123 Internal Review period and report any
identified improper payment amounts in the FY 2021 AFR. Planned:
12/1/22

21-P00042-451
Recommendation: Adopt and implement policies and procedures on
military leave and pay requirements that comply with 5 U.S. C. §§5538,
6323, and 5519.
12/28/20
Corrective Action 1.1: The OMS will update policy and finalize
procedures to comply with statutory requirements. Planned: 4/30/22
Recommendation: Provide resources for supervisors, timekeepers, and
reservists on their roles and responsibilities related to military leave
under the law and Agency policies.
Corrective Action 2.1: The OMS will update policy and finalize
procedures to comply with statutory requirements. Planned: 4/30/22
Recommendation: Establish and implement internal controls that will
allow the Agency to monitor compliance with applicable laws, federal
guidance, and Agency policies, including periodic internal audits of all
military leave, to verify that (a) charges by reservists are correct and
supported and (b) appropriate reservist differential and military offset
payroll audit calculations are being requested and performed.
Corrective Action 3.1: The OMS will conduct periodic human capital
audits to ensure compliance with the updated military leave policy.
Planned: 6/30/22
Recommendation: Require reservists to correct, and supervisors to
approve, military leave time charging errors in PeoplePlus that have
been identified during the audit or as part of the Agency's actions
related to Recommendations 5 and 6.
Corrective Action 4.1: The OCFO will work with the agency's payroll
provider to confirm the necessary time charging errors identified in the
audit were corrected by the employee and approved by the supervisor;
and the OCFO will then provide a report to the OMS confirming the
necessary time charging errors identified in the audit were corrected by
the employee and approved by the supervisor for the OMS to distribute
to the appropriate offices. Planned: 6/30/22
Recommendation: Recover the approximately $11,000 in military pay
related to unsupported 5 U.S.C. § 6323(a) military leave charges unless
the Agency can obtain documentation to substantiate the validity of the
reservists' military leave.
Corrective Action 5.1: For any unsupported leave charges, the OMS
will coordinate with the IBC, the agency's payroll provider, to initiate
the process to recover the military pay, and where applicable, the
OCFO will recover any unsupported leave charges for out-of-service
debt. Planned: 5/31/22
Recommendation: Submit documentation for the reservists' military
leave related to the approximately $118,000 charged under 5 U.S.C. §
6323(b) to EPA's payroll provider so that it may perform payroll audit
calculations and recover any military offsets that may be due.
Corrective Action 6.1: The OMS will work with EPA's programs and
regions to collect documentation related to the identified military leave
1154

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

charges. For any unsupported leave charges, the OMS will coordinate
with the IBC to initiate the process to recover any military offsets.
Planned: 5/31/22

21-P00042-451
Recommendation: Identify the population of reservists who took unpaid
military leave pursuant to 5U.S.C. §5538 and determine whether those
reservists are entitled to receive a reservist differential. Based on the
results of this determination, take appropriate steps to request that
EPA's payroll provider perform payroll audit calculations to identify
and pay the amounts that may be due to reservists.
12/28/20
Corrective Action 7.1: The OCFO will provide the OMS with the
population of reservists charging military leave. The OMS will conduct
a review of this population to determine which items need to be
provided to the IBC for audit calculation of whether military offsets
were paid accurately. Planned: 9/30/22
Recommendation: For the time periods outside of the scope of our audit
(pre-January 2017 and post-June 2019), identify the population of
reservists who charged military leave under 5 U.S.C. § 6323(b) or
6323(c), and determine whether military offset was paid by the
reservists. If not, review reservists' military documentation to
determine whether payroll audit calculations are required. If required,
request that EPA's payroll provider perform payroll audit calculations
to identify and recover military offsets that may be due from the
reservists under 5 U.S.C. §§ 6323 and 5519.
Corrective Action 8.1: The OCFO will provide the OMS with the
population of reservists charging military leave. The OMS will conduct
a review of this population to determine which items need to be
provided to the IBC for audit calculation of whether military offsets
were paid accurately. Planned: 9/30/22
Corrective Action 8.2: For any unsupported leave charges, The OMS
will coordinate with the IBC to initiate the process to recover any
military offsets. The OCFO will recover any unsupported leave charges
for out-of-service debt. Planned: 9/30/22
21-F00045-130
Recommendation: Strengthen and improve the preparation and
management review of the financial statements so that errors and
misstatements are detected and corrected.
1/5/21
Corrective Action: The agency has implemented numerous actions in
FY 2020 which will improve the preparation and review of financial
statements, including a new financial statement preparation checklist
and software package. The agency will continue to review its processes
for preparing financial statements and identify additional improvements
to strengthen the preparation process further. In addition, the agency
will prepare and release all component statement audits at the same
time to allow for uniform footnote disclosures and to ensure that
accrual adjustments are applied in the same manner for all statements.
Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: Analyze adjustments and corrections to the financial
statements so that such adjustments are appropriate, accurate, and
properly supported by documentation.
1155

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
RecomiiUMulittioiis ;iikI Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

Corrective Action: The agency makes every effort to ensure that
adjustments and corrections appropriate, accurate, and properly
supported, however, in addition to the actions taken under
recommendation one, we will continue to review with staff the need to
include more of the supporting analysis and rationale behind the
adjustments made and the accounting basis for them. Management
reviews of journal vouchers will continue, and additional training will
be provided as needed. Planned: 3/31/22

Recommendation: Record accounts receivable and earned revenue in
the appropriate fiscal year.
Corrective Action: The FY 2019 adjustments were completed prior to
issuance of the final financial statements. Monthly reconciliations will
be performed to ensure the accounts receivable and earned revenue are
recorded in the appropriate period. Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: In coordination with the assistant administrator for
Land and Emergency Management, analyze e-Manifest billings so that
accounts receivable and earned revenue are recorded accurately.
Corrective Action: Monthly reconciliation will be performed to ensure
the accounts receivable and earned revenue are recorded accurately.
Planned: 3/31/22
21-E00072-164
Recommendation: Develop program objectives and measures and
implement data-collection processes to determine the risk-reduction and
pollution-prevention outcomes of the Special Local Needs program.
2/10/21
Corrective Action: 40 CFR 162.154(c) requires EPA to make a final
decision on disapproval of a State registration, and provide written
notification thereof to the State, within 90 days of the effective date of
the registration. To implement Recommendation 1, OCSPP will
undertake a data review effort to assess how the Agency's review
process is performing on the requirement to either disapprove or
acknowledge a 24(c) action within 90 days. Data collection will be
undertaken for 12 months, followed by an evaluation of the collected
data. Using this data, by July 1, 2022, OCSPP will develop a
performance measure to track how the program is performing relative
to the 90-day response timeline in 40 C.F.R. 162. The measure will
include data on the performance of the office regarding this timing goal.
This analysis will inform OCSPP on whether it is necessary to make
changes to the review process to achieve the 90-day requirement.
Planned: 7/1/22
21-P00094-451
Recommendation: Create a software license inventory policy, which
will include identifying the number of licenses, license-counts
authorized, overall costs of licenses, maintenance fees, and contracts
used for each licensed software. Track and report savings produced by
software licensing inventory and report the savings as part of the Office
of Management and Budget's annual Spend Under Management data.
03/10/21
Corrective Action 10: Create a software license inventory policy, which
will include identifying the number of licenses, license-counts
authorized, overall costs of licenses, maintenance fees, and contracts
used for each licensed software. Track and report savings produced by
1156

-------
I V Audit
Nil m her
kecommeiHliilions itiul Correctne Actions
Report
Ditto

software licensing inventory and report it as part of the U.S. Office of
Management and Budget's annual Spend Under Management data.
Planned: 12/31/22

21-P00114-167
Recommendation: Develop and implement controls to verify that the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act referrals to the Superfund
program are added to Superfund Enterprise Management System for
further Superfund program attention, as necessary.
3/29/21
Corrective Action: OLEM/OSRTI will: (1) update the Superfund
Program Implementation Manual (SPIM) as appropriate to include
clearer timelines on updating the RCRAInfo identification number
currently tracked in the Superfund Enterprise Management System
(SEMS); (2) verify sites referred from RCRA to Superfund are added to
SEMS for further Superfund program attention, as necessary; and (3)
revise OSRTI-managed SEMS public search tools and publicly
available SEMS computer reports to include the SEMS RCRAInfo
identification number variable. Planned: 3/31/22
Recommendation: Develop and implement controls to verify that the
Superfund program deferrals to the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act are added to RCRAInfo for further Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act attention, as necessary.
Corrective Action: OLEM/ORCR will (1) evaluate the existing policies
and process for Superfund deferrals to RCRA; (2) identify gaps; and,
(3) identify corrective measures, as needed, to meet program needs,
such as identifying Superfund program deferrals to RCRA in
RCRAInfo. Planned: 9/30/23
Recommendation: Develop and maintain a crosswalk of Superfund
Enterprise Management System and corresponding RCRAInfo
identification numbers.
Corrective Action: OLEM will work with EPA's Facility Registry
Service (FRS) team in OMS-EI to create and maintain a solution which
allows users to obtain the crosswalk of SEMS and RCRAInfo
identification numbers. Planned: 12/31/22
Recommendation: Develop and implement controls to identify and
eliminate overlap of environmental indicators between Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action and Superfund
Programs and include this information in public queries, such as
Cleanups in My Community.
Corrective Action 6.1: OLEM will standardize communications on the
Cleanups in My Community webpage regarding the intersection of
RCRA Corrective Action and Superfund cleanup programs, including
environmental indicator designations at sites. Planned: 6/30/22
Corrective Action 6.2: OLEM will implement controls to check
between programs when environmental indicators are established in the
future to prevent double-counting and inconsistencies. Planned: 3/31/23
1157

-------
EPA GAP Open Recommendations and Recommendations Closed as Unimplemented
Report
Nil m her
Report
Issue
Diile
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
06-148
2006-
01-04
The Adnunislralor, LPA, should Lake 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.
LPA and GAO conlinuc lo engage on llns
topic. The agency expects that the
modernized SDWIS database will have
the necessary information and an efficient
mechanism to evaluate if data are current,
accurate, and complete. In December
2021, EPA requested closure of this
recommendation.
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.
From FY 2018-2021, the IRIS Program
capacity has remained unchanged
(approximately 40 assessment FTE, $ 11
million/FY). The Program has sufficient
staff and budgetary resources to advance
the 17 chemical assessments as prioritized
by EPA program and regional offices and
as listed on the IRIS Program Outlook.
See documentation provided on July 15,
2021. EPA is engaging in an ongoing
series of IRIS briefings with the GAO and
parties are coming closer to agreement.
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.
EPA and GAO continue to engage on this
topic. The agency expects that the
modernized SDWIS database will have
the necessary information and an efficient
mechanism to evaluate if data are current,
accurate, and complete. In December
2021, EPA requested closure of this
recommendation.
1158

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
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.
EPA and GAO continue to engage on this
topic. The agency expects that the
modernized SDWIS database will have
the necessary information and an efficient
mechanism to evaluate if data are current,
accurate, and complete. In December
2021, EPA requested closure of this
recommendation.
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.
The IRIS Integrated Assessment Plans and
Systematic Review Protocols document
extensively, considerations which inform
the timelines presented in the IRIS
Program Outlook. In addition to scientific
considerations, timelines presented in the
Program Outlook also reflect the needs of
the nominating program and regions.
Updates to the timelines occur at least
three times a year (February, June,
October). The most recent October 20201
Program Outlook lists all 157 ongoing
IRIS chemical assessments. EPA is
engaging in an ongoing series of IRIS
briefings with the GAO and parties are
coming closer to agreement.
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,
Closed - Not Implemented
In an effort to reduce the reporting burden
on agencies, OMB stopped requiring
agency reports of enterprise architecture
outcomes. Implementation is no longer
required.
1159

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


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.

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 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.
Closed - Not Implemented
In an effort to reduce the reporting burden
on agencies, OMB stopped requiring
agency reports of enterprise architecture
outcomes. Implementation is no longer
required.
1160

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
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.
This work is planned for completion by
December 31, 2022.
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 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.
In 2021, the GAO narrowed their focus to
Item #5 of the recommendation. OCSPP
met with GAO in January 2022 to provide
an update regarding resources and risk
management.
1161

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
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 available,
applicable, or current.
Although EPA and GAO were at an
impasse regarding implementation of this
recommendation, the recent and ongoing
series of IRIS briefings with the GAO
enabled the two parties to reach an
agreement. The agency anticipates closure
of this recommendation by Q4 of FY
2022.
GAO-
14-413

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.
The agency developed and implemented
the Software Asset Management (SAM)
tool in CY 2021. Population of the tool,
communication across the agency, and
training are ongoing. The agency
anticipates completion of the effort on
September 30, 2022. Once completed, the
agency will work to develop a
comprehensive policy that addresses the
centralized management of licenses.
GAO-
14-65
2013-
11-06
To improve the agency's
implementation of Portfolio Stat, the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency should direct the
CIO to develop a complete commodity
IT baseline.
In December 2021, EPA provided
documentation supporting full
implementation of this recommendation.
The agency requested closure.
GAO-
14-65
2013-
11-06
To improve the agency's
implementation of Portfolio Stat, in
future reporting to OMB, the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency should direct the
CIO to fully describe the following
EPA considers this recommendation
implemented. The agency has made
tremendous progress in reducing
Commodity IT expenditures by
developing and implementing Commodity
IT Enterprise Shared Services.
1162

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


Portfolio Stat 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.
Additionally, the agency has 3
mechanisms that identify wasteful, low-
value, or duplicative investments.
Information Technology (IT) Portfolio
Reviews (ITPRs) is an annual IT portfolio
review of each of the 22 Programs and
Regions. EPA considers this
recommendation to be fully implemented
and requested closure.
GAO-
14-65
2013-
11-06
To improve the agency's
implementation of Portfolio Stat, 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.
In December 2020, EPA provided
documentation of the requests that were
used to purchase the tools needed to
complete the enterprise upgrades noted in
GAO's report as well as Performance
Statement. The agency requested closure
of the recommendation.
GAO-
14-80
2013-
12-05
To enhance the likelihood that
TMDLs support the nation's waters'
attainment of water quality standards
and to strengthen water quality
management, the Administrator of
EPA should develop and issue new
regulations requiring that TMDLs
include additional elements—and
consider requiring the elements that
are now optional—specifically,
elements reflecting key features
identified by NRC as necessary for
attaining water quality standards, such
as comprehensive identification of
impairment and plans to monitor water
bodies to verify that water quality is
improving.
EPA maintains that the actions taken to
strengthen the TMDL program satisfy the
intent of the recommendation. However,
the agency is reviewing and considering
recent feedback from GAO.
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
EPA developed a recommended
Reinvestment Plan and delivered a CIO
Reinvestment Plan decision brief on
12/09/21. The agency is establishing an
implementation plan and timeline based
on CIO guidance.
1163

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


from OMB-directed IT reform-related
efforts.

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.
The BFS Performance Results Data Entry
Import feature was deployed for use in
April 2021, followed by training for
potential users. System data shows that the
new feature is in use. The agency
requested closure of this recommendation.
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.
EPA is considering a grantee web-based
portal. The agency will continue to
provide progress updates to auditors.
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.
In FY 2021, the Water Sector
Coordinating Council conducted a
cybersecurity survey of the water sector.
This survey included performance metrics.
In addition, EPA has been conducting
cybersecurity assessments at individual
water and wastewater utilities using
technical assistance providers. These
assessments also use cybersecurity
performance metrics. The agency
requested closure.
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
EPA has a continuing dialogue
surrounding this topic with GAO. The
agency expects the modernized SDWIS
database will have the necessary
information and an efficient mechanism to
evaluate if data are current, accurate, and
1164

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


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.
complete. EPA requested closure of 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
certification will be documented; and
a definition of incremental
development and time frames for
delivering functionality, consistent
with OMB guidance.
On 3/2/22, EPA submitted documentation
supporting full implementation and
requested 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.
EPA submitted supporting documentation
and a request for closure in December
2022. On 3/3/22, GAO alerted EPA that
the recommendation is in review for
closure.
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.
The Puget Sound Partnership (NEP)
continues to be on schedule to finalize
their next CCMP by summer 2022. The
document will include updated vital
signs/measures and associated indicators.
The agency will request closure at that
time.
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.
EPA provided documentation supporting
agency actions to define CIO role and key
responsibilities. Awaiting GAO feedback.
1165

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
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.
EPA held EPA's Grants Webinar for
Tribes as previously reported, from which
materials were made available to tribes.
OITA has completed and made available
OMB-required funding award Merit
Review Checklists for General Assistance
Program (GAP), Performance Partnership
Grants (PPGS), and Direct
Implementation Tribal Cooperative
Agreements (DITCAS) in 2021. Merit
Review Checklists were created for all
EPA tribal, and other, funding award
programs by the respective EPA offices
and are available. The agency requested
closure.
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 membership—
for all committees.
EPA considers this recommendation to be
fully implemented and 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.
Implementation of an electronic financial
disclosure reporting system for special
government employees is expected to be
complete by the end of FY 2022.
GAO-
19-384
2019-
07-25
The Administrator of EPA should
establish a process for conducting an
organization-wide cybersecurity risk
assessment.
EPA is engaged with a third Party
Federally Funded Research Development
Corporation (FFRDC) to help develop and
an organizational wide cybersecurity risk
assessment. This process is expected to
begin developmental Q3 FY 2022 with the
intent of executing Q3 FY 2023.
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.
EPA is updating current processes for
Enterprise Risk Management and
Cybersecurity Risk Assessment to build
out a single Enterprise Risk Management
Program starting in Spring FY 2022.
Implementation is planned for Q2 FY
2023.
1166

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
19-543
:uiy-
09-16
The Adnunislrulor ol' LPA, as chair of
the working group, should develop
guidance for agencies on what they
should include in their environmental
justice strategic plans.
The Environmental Justice Interagency
Working Group (EJ IWG) no longer
exists, and federal environmental justice
efforts are being organized under the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
under Executive Order 14008. EPA is
working with CEQ to carry out three main
efforts under the Executive Order: develop
an environmental justice screening tool,
identify funding opportunities, and
identify areas to update the previous
Executive Order 12898.
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.
The Environmental Justice Interagency
Working Group (EJ IWG) no longer
exists, and federal environmental justice
efforts are being organized under the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
under Executive Order 14008. EPA is
working with CEQ to carry out three main
efforts under the Executive Order: develop
an environmental justice screening tool,
identify funding opportunities, and
identify areas to update the previous
Executive Order 12898.
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 government's efforts to carry
out the 1994 Executive Order.
The Environmental Justice Interagency
Working Group (EJ IWG) no longer
exists, and federal environmental justice
efforts are being organized under the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
under Executive Order 14008. EPA is
working with CEQ to carry out three main
efforts under the Executive Order: develop
an environmental justice screening tool,
identify funding opportunities, and
identify areas to update the previous
Executive Order 12898.
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.
The Environmental Justice Interagency
Working Group (EJ IWG) no longer
exists, and federal environmental justice
efforts are being organized under the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
under Executive Order 14008. EPA is
working with CEQ to carry out three main
efforts under the Executive Order: develop
an environmental justice screening tool,
identify funding opportunities, and
1167

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us



identify areas to update the previous
Executive Order 12898.
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.
The DWCMS SSP has been updated to
reflect the missing information, including
a description of security controls, and the
individual reviewing and approving the
plan and date of approval.
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.
The latest SAR for DWCMS has been
updated. This SAR identifies and provides
details (Appendix A) as well as the
summarized results of control
effectiveness tests as a part of the security
assessment for the system.
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.
EPA is in the process of updating the
POAM item. Program Office has
completed its remediation efforts. OISP
validating POA&M can be closed
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.
EPA's CIO issued a memo granting the
ATO for DWCMS on August 28, 2019.
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.
EPA has an SOP, dated November 12,
2019, for submitting agency ATO letters
to FedRAMP
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.
EPA considers this recommendation to be
fully implemented. The agency requested
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
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
1168

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


in a network to help drinking water
and wastewater utilities incorporate
climate resilience into their projects
and planning on an ongoing basis.
are sustainable and resilient in the long
term.
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 use of
the framework across its critical
infrastructure sector using existing
initiatives.
EPA consulted with sector partners,
including the Water Sector Coordinating
Council and DHS, to collect and report
sector wide improvements from use of the
Framework. The agency continues to
coordinate with DHS to address this
recommendation.
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.
EPA continues to disagree with the need
for this recommendation because the
action requested is being implemented in
coordination with the HHS and 13 other
federal and non-federal partners
committed to the reduction of lead levels
in drinking water in schools. In support of
this position, the agency provided
documentation titled "EPA Efforts to
Implement the Memorandum of
Understanding on Reducing Lead in
Schools and Child Care Facilities and
Child Care Facilities in Drinking Water"
that offers more detail of EPA's efforts
related to reduce lead levels in schools &
childcare facilities.
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.
EPA continues to disagree with the need
for this recommendation because the
action requested is being implemented in
coordination with the HHS and 13 other
federal and non-federal partners
committed to the reduction of lead levels
in drinking water in schools. The agency
shared documents with GAO titled "EPA
Efforts to Implement the Memorandum of
Understanding on Reducing Lead in
Schools and Child Care Facilities and
Child Care Facilities in Drinking Water"
and "Chronological List of Activities
Underway to Address the
Recommendations" which provide more
details associated with these efforts.
1169

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
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.
OLEM will ensure its actions to address
climate change effects at nonfederal NPL
sites align with the goals and objectives in
the FY 2022-2026 EPA Strategic Plan.
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.
Instructional and training materials were
shared EPA-wide through the intranet site
and through the Public Access Forum
members. Additionally, EPA's Science
and Technology Policy Council agreed to
a recommendation by the agency's Public
Access Forum to reconstitute a training
workgroup. The training workgroup is
charged with reviewing existing training
materials, evaluating gaps, and developing
and disseminating new training materials.
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 clearly
document in guidance to the regional
offices how they should use the
definition of informal enforcement
actions to collect data on these actions.
The updated guidance is currently under
review with agency leadership. The
document focuses on key terms used in
EPA's enforcement program. The
principal purpose is to promote
consistency and clarity in the use of these
terms, which will support EPA's efforts to
use, report, track, and measure the
deployment of enforcement response tools
and their utility in expeditiously returning
facilities to compliance. EPA plans to
complete implementation in 2022.
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.
OECA is tracking compliance assistance
activities for the National Compliance
Initiatives (NCI). Reporting of NCI
compliance assistance accomplishments
are included in the NCI End of Year
reporting process. Entering the data into
ICIS is voluntary.
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.
In the fiscal year 2020 Enforcement
Annual results report/website, the agency
created and provided a webpage to
describe how best to interpret the data
presented in its "Fiscal Year EPA
Enforcement and Compliance Annual
1170

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us



Results." EPA requested closure of this
recommendation.
GAO-
21-
103181
2021-
09-21
The Administrator of EPA should
fully describe available public
comment data, including any
limitations, to external users of the
data. This should include coordination
with GSA, as the manager of
Regulations.gov, as appropriate.
EPA met with GSA and other federal
agencies identified in the GAO report.
EPA is updating the website to include
additional information on the availability
of public comment data.
GAO-
21-12
2021-
01-21
The Administrator of EPA should
direct its chemical safety and security
programs to collaborate with partners
and establish an iterative and ongoing
process to identify the extent to which
the facilities that it regulates are also
covered by the CFATS program.
EPA collaborated with DHS to draft a
joint interagency procedure. DHS, EPA,
DOT, and ATF are all signatories to the
final document. DHS will provide the
interagency document and request for
closure of the recommendation on behalf
of all four agencies following final
signature.
GAO-
21-12
2021-
01-21
EPA should collaborate with the
DHS's Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency to
assess the extent to which potential
security gaps exist at water and
wastewater facilities and, if gaps exist,
develop a legislative proposal for how
best to address them and submit it to
the Secretary of Homeland Security
and Administrator of EPA, and
Congress, as appropriate.
EPA agrees with this recommendation and
is coordinating with DHS to address
implementation.
GAO-
21-150
2020-
10-20
The Associate Administrator of EPA's
Office of Congressional and
Intergovernmental Relations should
update Performance Partnership Grant
(PPG) best practices guidance for
tribes to clarify, for EPA and tribal
staff, how PPGs operate, including
that tribes may use PPG funds for any
activity that is eligible under any grant
eligible for inclusion in PPGs.
EPA maintains that OCIR's National
Program Guidance (NPG) serves as the
main document to communicate the
agency's operational priorities, strategies,
and performance measures. Due in part to
the findings of GAO's report, OCIR will
include more foundational guidance
related to PPGs in its FY 2023-2024 NPG.
The FY 2023-2024 NPG also will cite
different reference resources including the
best practices guide; a group of regional
and headquarters staff is working to revise
the best practices guide with the goal of
posting the revised guides in Spring of
2022.
1171

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
21-150
2020-
10-20
The Director of EPA's Office of
Grants and Debarment, working with
each region's grant management
office, should develop and nationally
distribute onboarding materials for
grant specialists and project officers
new to working with Indian tribes that
includes guidance specific to working
with tribes and tribal grants.
OGD reviewed existing training and
consulted with partners to determine
training needs. OGD is now working to
update existing training that will include
information on issues unique to working
with tribal grants.
GAO-
21-150
2020-
10-20
The Principal Deputy Assistant
Administrator of EPA's Office of Air
and Radiation, the Assistant
Administrator of EPA's Office of
Water, and the Director of EPA's
American Indian Environmental
Office should update and nationally
distribute guidance for project officers
and tribes that clarifies documentation
requirements and eligibility definitions
for quality assurance project plans and
the Indian Environmental General
Assistance Program.
QAPP Review Process: The QAPP for
Grants Project work is ongoing. The
streamlining process has primarily
implemented through EPA's E-Enterprise
Leadership Council. General Assistance
Program: The GAP program work is
ongoing. The program is currently
developing a new Guidance (to update
2013 Guidance) and a new allocation
formula, both of which will clarify
eligibility, funding levels, and other
requirements.
GAO-
21-156
2020-
12-18
The Administrator should direct the
Assistant Administrator of the Office
of Research and Development to
provide more information publicly
about where chemical assessments are
in the development process, including
internal and external steps in the
process, and changes to assessment
milestones.
The IRIS Program updated the IRIS
chemical landing pages to reflect the
current step of the process for each
assessment (e.g., Agency Review,
Interagency Review). EPA and GAO have
a continuing dialogue regarding the
remaining steps toward closure.
GAO-
21-156
2020-
12-18
The Administrator should direct the
Assistant Administrators of program
offices and Regional Administrators to
develop and make available guidance
for chemical assessment nominations.
Such guidance could include
information such as how to select
chemicals for IRIS assessment
nomination or for high priority needs,
criteria explaining how Assistant and
Regional Administrators determine
which nominations to support and
which they may choose not to support,
and how to document these decisions.
In February 2022 EPA and GAO
consulted regarding the path to closure of
this recommendation. Implementation is
currently in process.
1172

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
21-156
2020-
12-18
The Administrator should direct the
Assistant Administrator of the Office
of Research and Development to issue
criteria for how chemical assessment
nominations are selected for inclusion
in the IRIS Program's list of
assessments in development and
provide quality information about
such topics as defining high-priority
chemicals, prioritizing assessment
work, and determining the IRIS
Program's capacity to undertake work.
EPA provided documentation supporting
full implementation to GAO in March
2022. The agency requested closure.
GAO-
21-156
2020-
12-18
The Administrator of EPA should
direct the Office of Research and
Development to continue evaluating
the survey process used to solicit IRIS
user needs and assess key elements,
such as its purpose and timing, to
facilitate the collection of quality
information.
EPA provided documentation supporting
full implementation to GAO in March
2022. The agency requested closure.
GAO-
21-156
2020-
12-18
The Administrator of EPA should
include in ORD's strategic plan (or
subsidiary strategic plans)
identification of EPA's universe of
chemical assessment needs; how the
IRIS Program is being resourced to
meet user needs; and specific
implementation steps that indicate
how IRIS will achieve the plan's
objectives, such as specific metrics to
define progress in meeting user needs.
EPA has partially implemented this
recommendation and is meeting regularly
with auditors in 2022 to address the
remaining aspects.
GAO-
21-
164SU
2020-
10-27
Recommendations from this restricted
report are not publicly available.
Not Publicly Available
GAO-
21-290
2021-
07-12
The Assistant Administrator of EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should revise
its guidance to select files for its State
Review Framework assessments of
state-reported data to incorporate
statistically valid probability
sampling.
EPA agrees with this recommendation.
The agency will complete decisions
related to the State Review Framework
file sampling methodology by 3/31/23.
GAO-
21-290
2021-
07-12
The Assistant Administrator of EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should ensure
that consolidated, complete, and
updated information on all data
The agency plans to complete this
consolidation by 9/30/22.
1173

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


limitations is disclosed on the State
Water Dashboard.

GAO-
21-290
2021-
07-12
The Assistant Administrator of EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should develop
a plan to determine the overall
accuracy and completeness of the
permit limit and discharge monitoring
report data recorded in its national
database.
The agency is addressing this
recommendation with a two-phase plan: 1)
EPA will continue to work with states to
identify and correct problems that prevent
proper transfer of discharge monitoring
report data to the Integrated Compliance
Information System. NPDES and work to
maximize the amount of discharge
monitoring report data and all necessary
permit limit data in the system. 2) The
agency will develop a methodology to
examine the accuracy of the discharge
monitoring report and permit limit data
received by the ICIS-NPDES system from
authorized states. Completion is estimate
for 2025.
GAO-
21-290
2021-
07-12
The Assistant Administrator of EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should develop
a performance measure to track the
reduction in pollutant discharges
resulting from enforcement actions for
facilities in significant noncompliance
and disclose any limitations.
The agency is addressing recommendation
in two ways: 1) EPA will continue to
report annually the Estimated Water
Pollutants resulting from enforcement
actions (Estimated Water Pollutants
Reduced, Treated or Eliminated for the
Clean Water Act NPDES Program) in the
Enforcement and Compliance Annual
Results that also will include a page
identifying data limitations. 2) The agency
will develop a methodology and outcome
measure for tracking the extent to which
the significant noncompliance national
compliance initiative achieves reductions
in illegal pollutant discharges. EPA
anticipates the implementation of this new
measure by 12/31/22.
GAO-
21-291
2021-
03-26
The Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Water should develop
definitions for all utility ownership
types for regional offices and states to
use when entering data on ownership
type in EPA's Safe Drinking Water
Information System and should verify
and correct the data as needed.
EPA generally agrees that it would be
useful to conduct another CWSS to collect
updated information on drinking water
utilities. The updated information could be
used, along with other sources such as
contaminant occurrence data and peer
reviewed studies on contaminant health
effects and treatment technologies, to
inform EPA's regulatory activities as well
as other efforts.
1174

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
21-291
2021-
03-26
The Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Water should conduct
another Community Water System
Survey to establish an updated,
accurate baseline of drinking water
utility information for rulemaking and
other purposes.
EPA does not require water system
ownership information for the
implementation of SDWA. However, EPA
and its partners in SDWA implementation
find value in improving the clarity and
accuracy of information on the
characteristics of public water systems.
The agency is currently working to
modernize SDWIS and plans to
incorporate the definitions for the six
ownership categories into the updated
version of SDWIS. EPA requested closure
of this recommendation.
GAO-
21-38
2020-
11-12
The Assistant Administrator of EPA's
Office of Air and Radiation, in
consultation with state and local
agencies, should develop, make
public, and implement an asset
management framework for
consistently sustaining the national
ambient air quality monitoring system.
Such a framework could be designed
for success by considering the key
characteristics of effective asset
management described in our report,
such as identifying the resources
needed to sustain the monitoring
system, using quality data to manage
infrastructure risks, and targeting
resources toward assets that provide
the greatest value.
EPA continues to engage with state, tribal,
and local partners on planning and
establishing an asset management plan.
The agency expects to roll out a proposed
approach on asset management during
2022 for stakeholder feedback and
estimates plan completion in 2023.
GAO-
21-38
2020-
11-12
The Assistant Administrator of EPA's
Office of Air and Radiation, in
consultation with state and local
agencies and other relevant federal
agencies, should develop and make
public an air quality monitoring
modernization plan to better meet the
additional information needs of air
quality managers, researchers, and the
public. Such a plan could address the
ongoing challenges in modernizing the
national ambient air quality
monitoring system by considering
leading practices, including
establishing priorities and roles,
assessing risks to success, identifying
the resources needed to achieve goals,
EPA worked with stakeholders to initiate
planning for a modernization strategy.
Coinciding with this initial work, EPA
received funds through the American
Rescue Plan (ARP) for enhanced air
quality monitoring. In the planning for
distribution of ARP funds, EPA
considered the GAO call for
modernization in the planning of a grant
competition and direct awards for air
monitoring agencies. EPA plans to engage
stakeholders in both large and small
groups during 2022 to continue to map out
what modernization looks like for all
parties. This critical information will
inform the priorities for the modernization
strategy.
1175

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


and measuring and evaluating
progress.

GAO-
21-413
2021-
06-30
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should ensure that collaboration
occurs between the SBIR program
office and the Office of Inspector
General to establish fraud indicators
and train applicants.
EPA agrees with this recommendation and
is working with the Office of Inspector
General to review Small Business
Innovation Research program fraud
indicators and modify materials currently
used for training applicants as necessary.
The estimated completion date is 12/1/22
GAO-
21-42
2020-
11-24
The Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency
should take additional steps to
complete and document a fraud risk
profile for the purchase card program
that aligns with the leading practices
in the Fraud Risk Framework and
includes an assessment of how, if at
all, the risk profile differs for purchase
card use in support of disaster
response.
On 2/4/22 GAO confirmed that this
recommendation is considered fully
implemented and scheduled for formal
closure.
GAO-
21-63
2021-
01-15
The Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
coordinate with states to collect
information on the use of the
designated representative, either
through its annual cooperative
agreement work plans with states or
another mechanism. The collection of
information on use could include
consistently compiling the information
obtained through inspections across
states—specifically, whether
farmworkers are using designated
representatives and whether farmers
are providing the information to the
designated representatives within the
time frames required by the WPS.
EPA considers this recommendation to be
fully implemented and has requested
closure. GAO is currently reviewing.
1176

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
21-63
2021-
01-15
The Director for EPA's Office of
Pesticide Programs should, in the
agency's guidance, on its website, or
through another mechanism, explain
EPA's expectations about the
appropriate use of the pesticide
information obtained by a designated
representative, including describing
potential misuse of such information.
The agency coordinated with the
Association of American Pest Control
Officials - State FIFRA Issues Research
and Evaluation Group (AAPCO/SFIREG)
to provide information on their members'
use of the designated representative
provision. AAPCO/SFIREG received
responses from twenty-seven states, one
tribe and the District of Columbia.
According to the respondents to the
AAPCO/SFIREG questions, there was
compliance with the designated
representative provision in their states.
However, some respondents thought
additional training and compliance
assistance materials could be helpful. Full
implementation is anticipated by January
2023.
GAO-
21-78
2020-
12-18
EPA's Assistant Administrator for
Water should develop guidance for
water systems that outlines methods to
use ACS data and, where available,
geospatial lead or other data to
identify high-risk locations in which to
focus lead reduction efforts, including
tap sampling and lead service line
replacement efforts.
The agency is currently developing
guidance on lead service line replacement.
This guidance will include, but is not
limited to, information on selecting
inventory format such as a map, as well as
multiple factors to consider for prioritizing
the investigation of Lead Status Unknown
service lines. EPA will share the guidance
with GAO when it is finalized.
GAO-
21-78
2020-
12-18
EPA's Assistant Administrator for
Water should incorporate use of (1)
ACS data on neighborhood
characteristics potentially associated
with the presence of lead service lines
and (2) geospatial lead data, when
available, into EPA's efforts to
address the Federal Action Plan to
Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures
and Associated Health Impacts.
The LCRR's requirement for water
systems to create inventories of LSLs will
allow communities to overlay LSL
locations with ACS data, including EPA's
EJ Screen tool, to assess the presence of
LSLs in relation to neighborhood
characteristics. EPA issued a Federal
Register Notice on 12/17/21 summarizing
the input from the public engagements and
announcing the conclusion of the LCRR
review.
GAO-
21-78
2020-
12-18
EPA's Assistant Administrator for
Water should develop a strategic plan
that meets the WIIN Act requirement
for providing targeted outreach,
education, technical assistance, and
risk communication to populations
affected by the concentration of lead
in public water systems, and that is
The agency developed a strategic plan that
meets the WIIN Act requirements under
SDWA 1414(c)(5). EPA continues to
focus on implementation of
communication and lead reduction efforts
for vulnerable populations and
disadvantaged communities.
1177

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us


fully consistent with leading practices
for strategic plans.

GAO-
21-82
2020-
12-09
The Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
communicate final guidance for future
national initiative cycles to all states
before the effective date of the
national initiatives.
OECA communicated the final National
Initiative guidance to all states as in the
fall of 2020. The next National Initiative
cycle will begin in FY 2024 and OECA
will continue the practice.
GAO-
21-82
2020-
12-09
The Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should
incorporate lessons learned from the
initial effort to engage earlier and
more continuously with states when
developing the office's plan for how
EPA will work with states on future
national initiatives.
OECA will incorporate lessons learned
from working with states during the FY
2020 - 2023 cycle into the upcoming cycle
beginning in FY 2024.
GAO-
21-82
2020-
12-09
The Assistant Administrator for EPA's
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance should ensure
that officials document the outcomes
of EPA's primary method of assessing
enforcement and compliance activities
at the regional level—in-person and
videoconference meetings—including
progress toward performance goals
that support the agency's strategic
objectives.
EPA considers this recommendation to be
fully implemented and has requested
closure.
GAO-
21-87
2020-
12-18
The Director of EPA's Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery
should develop an implementation
plan for conducting a study and
developing recommendations for
administrative or legislative action
regarding the effect of existing public
policies, and the likely effect of
modifying or eliminating such
incentives and disincentives, upon the
reuse, recycling, and conservation of
materials, as required by RCRA.
The agency provided the National
Recycling Strategy and implementation
roadmap to GAO in a December 2021
update. GAO is currently reviewing the
implementation plan.
1178

-------
Report
.Nil m her
Report
Issue
D.ite
Reconinieiicliilion Text
St:it us
GAO-
21-87
2020-
12-18
The Director of EPA's Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery
should develop an implementation
plan for conducting a study and
developing recommendations for
administrative or legislative action
regarding the necessity and method of
imposing disposal or other charges on
packaging, containers, vehicles, and
other manufactured goods to reflect
the cost of final disposal, the value of
recoverable components of the item,
and any social costs associated with
nonrecycling or uncontrolled disposal,
as required by RCRA.
The agency provided the National
Recycling Strategy and implementation
roadmap to GAO in a December 2021
update. GAO is currently reviewing the
implementation plan.
GAO-
21-87
2020-
12-18
The Director of EPA's Office of
Resource Conservation and Recovery
should, while EPA finalizes and
implements its national recycling
strategy, incorporate desirable
characteristics for effective national
strategies, including (1) identifying the
resources and investments needed, and
balancing the risk reductions with
costs; (2) clarifying the roles and
responsibilities of participating
entities; and (3) articulating how it
will implement the strategy and
integrate new activities into existing
programs and activities.
The agency provided the National
Recycling Strategy and implementation
roadmap to GAO in a December 2021
update. GAO is currently reviewing the
implementation plan.
1179

-------
Working Capital Fund
In FY 2023, the Agency will be in its 27th 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) Act18 provided additional authority for
information technology development activities in agency working capital funds.19
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 2023, there will be 15 core agency activities provided under the WCF. These are the
Agency's information technology services, agency postage, Cincinnati voice services, background
investigations, enterprise human resources IT services, systems development, and facilities
alterations 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 Office of
Land and Emergency Management; regional information technology service and support managed
by EPA Region 8; legal services managed by the Office of General Counsel; and multimedia
services, and agency servicing contracts managed by the Office of the Administrator.
The Agency's FY 2023 budget request includes resources for these 15 core activities in each
National Program Manager's submission, totaling approximately $414 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
2023, 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 2023 due to several
IT improvements, including increased cloud computing, improved network infrastructure,
cybersecurity requirements, continuous diagnostic and mitigation program implementation, and
18	The MGT Act was enacted as part of the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act on December 12, 2017.
19	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.
1180

-------
discovery services. Other funding shifts have been included in the FY 2023 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.
1181

-------
1182

-------