United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Chemical Safety
and Pollution Prevention
National Program Manager
Guidance
Final
FY 2012
EPA-740-B-11-001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
1. INTRODUCTION 5
2. REGIONAL PROGRAM PRIORITIES 5
OPP'S CROSS-REGIONAL PRIORITIES 5
OPP'S REGION-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES 5
OPPT'S PROGRAM-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES: 6
3. REGIONAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 6
OPP's CROSS-REGIONAL STRATEGIES 6
OPP's REGION-SPECIFIC STRATEGIES 7
OPPT PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REGIONAL STRATEGIES 8
4. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO PRIORITIES OR STRATEGIES FROM FY 2011 9
5. PROGRAM OFFICE CONTACTS 10
Office of Pesticide Programs 10
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 10
INTRODUCTION 11
1. OCSPP PROGRAM OVERVIEW 11
2. STRATEGIC PLAN 11
3. OPPORTUNITIES TO GAIN EFFICIENCY 13
4. SUSTAINABILITY 14
5. ENHANCED COLLABORATION WITH OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE
ASSURANCE 14
6. STRENGTHENING STATE GRANTS AND REPORTING 14
7. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AND ALIGNMENT 15
OPP REGIONAL OFFICE PROGRAM PRIORITIES 16
OPP CROSS-REGIONAL PRIORITIES 17
1. SCHOOL IPM 17
Program Description 17
Principal Activities for the Regional Offices May Include: 17
Regional ACS Measures 18
Page 2 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 18
2. STRENGTHENING STATE/TRIBAL PARTNERSHIPS THROUGH CONTINUED EFFECTIVE
MANAGEMENT GRANTS/COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS 18
Program Description 18
Principal Activities for the Regional Offices 19
Examples of Effective Regional Grant Oversight for Pesticide Program Areas 19
Regional ACS Measures 21
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 21
OPP REGION-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES 22
Guidelines for Regional-Specific Priority Areas to Strengthen State and Tribal Partnerships and Programs 22
1. PESTICIDE OCCUPATIONAL WORKER SAFETY (INCLUDING SOIL FUMIGATION) 24
Program Description 24
EnvironmentalJustice 25
Principal Activities for the Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 25
2. PESTICIDE CONTAINER-CONTAINMENT REGULATION IMPLEMENTATION 26
Program Description 26
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 26
3. PROTECTION OF WATER SOURCES FROM PESTICIDE EXPOSURE 26
Program Description 26
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 28
4. EXPANSION AND ENHANCEMENT OF PESTICIDE PROTECTIONS IN INDIAN COUNTRY..28
Program Description 28
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 29
5. BED BUG OUTREACH/ASSISTANCE 29
Program Description 29
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 29
6. ENDANGERED SPECIES 30
Program Description 30
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 31
7. ANTIMICROBIAL HOSPITAL DISINFECTANT EFFICACY/ MISBRANDING 31
Program Description 31
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area 32
Regional ACS Measures 32
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 33
Page 3 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
OPPT PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REGIONAL OFFICES PRIORITIES 35
1. LEAD RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM 35
Program Description 35
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices 36
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures 37
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 38
2. CHEMICAL RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 39
Program Description 39
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices 40
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures 41
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 41
3. CHEMICAL RISK REVIEW AND REDUCTION PROGRAM 42
Program Description 42
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices 43
4. POLLUTION PREVENTION 43
Program Description 43
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices 43
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures 44
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 44
OPPT CROSS-REGIONAL OFFICES PROGRAM ACTIVITY: COMMUNITY ACTION
FOR A RENEWED ENVIRONMENT (CARE) 47
Program Description 47
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices 47
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures 48
Definitions and Clarification of Measures 48
Page 4 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
The Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) National Program Manager
(NPM) Guidance outlines our FY 2012 program priorities for Regional Offices for each of our
national programs managed by the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) and the Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), and defines our FY 2012 program priorities,
implementation strategies and regional performance measures. This Guidance was developed in
coordination with other EPA National Program Managers, EPA Regional Offices, states,
territories, tribes, and other concerned stakeholders. (Throughout this document, the term state
may also include territories and tribes.) This Guidance identifies critical activities needed to be
conducted by Regional Offices to achieve the FY 2012 Annual Performance Plan as articulated
in the FY 2012 President's Budget, guided by the FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan.
Furthermore, OCSPP NPM Guidance for FY 2012 supports Administrator Jackson's Priority on
Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and integrates the Administrator's themes into our program
implementation strategies and activities where appropriate.
2. REGIONAL PROGRAM PRIORITIES
OCSPP's Regional Office program priorities for FY 2012 are:
OPP'S CROSS-REGIONAL PRIORITIES
1. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Schools: Decrease exposure of children to
pests and pesticides through increased adoption of verifiable and sustainable IPM
programs in schools at the elementary through high school levels
2. Strengthening State/Tribal Partnerships Through Continued Effective Management
Grants/Cooperative Agreements: Provide oversight to guarantee resources are
directed to areas where they are most needed, and that states are conducting
meaningful work in priority areas; and ensure that 100% of State and Territorial
Assistance Grant (STAG) funds are obligated within the first year of appropriation.
OPP'S REGION-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES
1. Pesticide Occupational Worker Safety (including Soil Fumigation): Provide worker
protection standard (WPS) compliance assistance, education and outreach for
growers, applicators and workers, and augment state and tribal pesticide worker
safety program efforts, including the new soil fumigation requirements.
2. Pesticide Container/Containment Regulation Implementation: Reduce incidents
associated with occupational exposure or environmental exposure that are caused by
the failure, inadequate storage or improper handling of pesticide containers.
Page 5 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
3. Protection of Water Resources from Pesticide Exposure (including support for
implementation of the NPDES Pesticide Permits): Ensure that pesticides do not
adversely affect the nation's water.
4. Expansion of Pesticide Protection in Indian Country: Protect human health and the
environment by ensuring pesticides and alternatives are available in Indian country
and can be used according to label directions without causing unreasonable risks.
5. Bed Bug Outreach/Assistance: EPA's efforts to address the national bed bug
epidemic through education and outreach on pesticide and integrated pest
management control approaches, and providing support to other federal state and
local agencies to respond to infestations.
6. Endangered Species Protection: Limit potential effects from pesticide use to listed
species, while at the same time not placing undue burden on agriculture or other
pesticide users.
7. Antimicrobial Hospital Disinfectants Efficacy andMisbranding: Address questions
from the regulated community and the public related to the Antimicrobial Testing
Program (ATP) and the efficacy of hospital disinfectants and tuberculocides.
OPPT'S PROGRAM-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES:
1. Reduce Lead Risks: Continue progress in reducing risks from lead-based paint and
disparities in blood lead levels between low income and non-low income children.
2. Reduce Risks from Other High-Concern Chemicals: Reduce exposure to and risks
from chemicals of high concern, including legacy chemicals with well-established
risks and newly identified chemicals of concern.
3. Prevent Pollution: Continue to eliminate or reduce waste at the point of generation,
conserve natural resources and promote the development and use of safer, "greener"
materials and products to achieve a healthier environment and a more sustainable
economy.
3. REGIONAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
OCSPP's Regional Office program priorities for FY 2012 are:
OPP's CROSS-REGIONAL STRATEGIES
1. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Schools: Increase activities to encourage
public school officials at the elementary through high school levels to adopt IPM
practices as a means to decrease exposure of children to pests and pesticides, such as
providing technical assistance, and conducting, funding or otherwise supporting
school IPM outreach and training programs.
Page 6 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
2. Management of State and Tribal Grants/Cooperative Agreement: Provide oversight
and support to our state and tribal partners to ensure that EPA resources are directed
to areas where they are most needed and best support the goals of the National
Pesticide Program; negotiate, implement, and manage state and tribal cooperative
agreements and grants consistent with the joint OPP/OECA FIFRA Cooperative
Agreement Guidance (FIFRA Grant Guidance); foster prompt and accurate
communication of Pesticide Program regulations, policies, and guidance to grantees;
and, provide effective technical assistance and policy support for the grantees.
OPP's REGION-SPECIFIC STRATEGIES
1. Pesticide Occupational Worker Safety (including Soil Fumigation): Continue WPS
(including soil fumigation) education, outreach and training for growers, applicators
and workers. If selected as a Regional priority, conduct at least one region-specific
project/initiative contributing to implementation/enhancement of the worker
protection and/or pesticide applicator certification field programs, or mitigation of
other occupational exposure risks. The goal of a WPS project should be enhanced
protection of agricultural pesticide workers, the goal of a Certification and Training
(C&T) project should be improved competency of certified pesticide applicators, and
the goal of other occupational exposure risk projects should be enhanced protection of
those workers, including outreach on the new soil fumigant requirements.
2. Pesticide Container/Containment Regulation Implementation: If selected as a
Regional priority, conduct at least one Region-specific project/initiative contributing
to implementation of the container/containment regulations. The goal of
container/containment Regional projects should be enhancing use of well-designed
pesticide containers, adequate containment for bulk pesticide storage and repackaging
activities, and/or proper handling of pesticide containers. This could involve training
state inspectors on the regulations, conducting outreach to industry within the Region,
developing educational or informational documents on the regulations or other
projects.
3. Protection of Water Resources from Pesticide Exposure (including support for
implementation of the NPDES Pesticide Permits): Conduct work to support states
and tribes evaluating pesticides to see if they are a concern to water resources,
managing pesticides of concern and demonstrating progress of pesticides in water
management strategies. Also, provide technical assistance to support development
and implementation of Pesticide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits issued under the Clean Water Act; and, provide outreach on the
new pesticide NPDES permits to pesticide users who may be covered by the new
requirements where routine opportunities present themselves. If selected as a
Regional priority, conduct at least one Region-specific project/initiative contributing
to protection of water sources from pesticide risk.
4. Expansion of Pesticide Protection in Indian Country: If selected as a Regional
priority, conduct at least one Region-specific project/initiative which expand pesticide
Page 7 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
program coverage and reduce pesticide risk in Indian Country and Alaska Native
Villages. Where appropriate, projects should seek to benefit multiple tribes. Projects
can include (a) working with tribes to develop tribal Pesticide Use Assessments, (b)
exploring tribal interest in participating in circuit-rider programs either by expanding
existing single tribe programs or establishing new circuit-rider programs or (c)
developing pesticide outreach materials useful to tribes.
5. Bed Bug Outreach/Assistance: Establish relationships with other federal, state, and
local agencies to assist them where needed in their combined bed bug infestation
responses/activities. If selected as a Regional priority, conduct at least one Region-
specific project/ initiative contributing to education about prevention of, or response
to, bed bug infestation, or providing technical assistance to states, tribes, pest
management professionals, local bed bug programs, environmental justice advocates,
the general public, or other stakeholders.
6. Endangered Species Protection: If selected as a Regional priority, conduct at least
one Region-specific project/initiative contributing to implementation of the Pesticide
Program Endangered Species Program and increased co-regulator and public
knowledge about the ESPP.
7. Antimicrobial Hospital Disinfectants Efficacy andMisbranding: If selected as a
Regional priority, conduct at least one region-specific project/initiative contributing
to implementation of the ATP and increased public knowledge about the safe and
effective use of hospital disinfectants. Work with OPP, OECA and states to collect
products for testing, follow up on product failures, using enforcement mechanisms
where warranted. Address questions from the regulated community and the public
related to the Antimicrobial Testing Program (ATP) and the efficacy of hospital
disinfectants and tuberculocides.
OPPT PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REGIONAL STRA TEGIES
1. Reduce Lead Risks: Implement lead-based paint risk reduction education, outreach
and regulatory implementation programs; continue overseeing the Section 404(g)
grant program; provide outreach for Pre-Renovation Education Rule (406) and
Disclosure Rule (1018); support the Training and Certification Rule 402(a), in EPA
States and Tribes; create opportunities for partnerships to address lead-based paint
hazards and exposure reduction; implement the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair
and Painting (RRP) Rule; and coordinate implementation of Lead Program activities
with OECA's implementation of compliance assistance, monitoring and enforcement
strategies.
2. Reduce Risks from Other High-Concern Chemicals: Focus on providing assistance to
federal agencies, states and tribes, local governments and school systems and others
with responsibility for ensuring proper use of poly chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and
implementing statutory requirements to address asbestos risks in schools.
Page 8 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
3. Prevent Pollution: Encourage cleaner production processes and technologies;
promote the development and use of safer, "greener" materials and products through
implementation of the Agency's new Framework for Sustainable Products; and
support the implementation of improved practices such as the use of conservation
techniques and the reuse of materials in lieu of their placement into the waste stream.
In implementing EPA's new Pollution Prevention and Sustainability Strategy,
leverage and coordinate effectively with all related Agency efforts to achieve a
healthier environment and a more sustainable economy.
4. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO PRIORITIES OR STRATEGIES FROM FY 2011
OCSPP's FY 2012 priorities for regional offices have been updated to reflect priorities, plans
and measures identified in the FY 2011 - FY 2015 EPA Strategic Plan and the FY 2012
President's Budget.
To add flexibility, the pesticide program portion of the OCSPP FY2012 NPM Guidance has been
restructured. The first section contains two new cross-regional priorities which require activities
from all regional offices; 1) Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Schools and 2) Cooperative
Agreement and Grant Oversight. Two new ACS measures have been added to track progress for
these two new cross-regional priorities.
The second section, "Regional-Specific" Priority Areas to Strengthen State and Tribal
Partnerships and Programs" contains several activities which support one or more FY 2011- 2015
Strategic Plan strategies and OPP goals. Regions will select at least two priorities from this
section for special focus and will conduct at least one special project in each area selected. This
approach recognizes that while an activity might be an overall priority for the National Pesticide
Program, the degree to which that activity is a priority in a particular Region may vary. The
priorities listed in this section are primarily the pesticide priorities continued from the FY 2011
OCSPP NPM Guidance, with the addition of "Bed Bug Outreach/Assistance," and "Endangered
Species Protection."
We have added one new ACS measure to track regional projects undertaken to support the
regional-specific priority areas. We have also discontinued the ACS measure tracking the
number of evaluated pesticides of concern that have been placed under State or Tribal Program
management due to their propensity to approach or exceed national water quality standards or
other human health or ecological reference points (ACS code WQ1), and the number of States
that the Region has assessed to determine if they have the capacity to implement the pesticides
Container-Containment rules (ACS code CR2). ACS code CR1, and WPCT which tracked
region specific projects contributing to the enhancement of worker safety, certification and
training and implementation of the container/container rule have all been combined into the new
ACS measure that will track regional specific projects supporting the regional specific priorities.
One deletion to the Annual Commitment System (ACS) measures has been made for the
Pollution Prevention Program; eliminating the measure targeting reductions in energy use, which
Page 9 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
has been superseded by the measure introduced in FY 2011 targeting reductions in greenhouse
gases more broadly. Regional Office and HQ have concurred on this change.
The strategies for the Pollution Prevention Program are now linked to the Agency's new
Framework for Sustainable Products and EPA's new Pollution Prevention and Sustainability
Strategy to leverage and coordinate effectively with all related Agency efforts to achieve a
healthier environment and a more sustainable economy.
5. PROGRAM OFFICE CONTACTS
For general comments or questions, please contact Jennifer Vernon (202-564-6573). For
program-specific questions, please contact:
Office of Pesticide Programs
• Daniel Helfgott, Field and External Affairs Division (703-308-8054)
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
• Mike Burns, Environmental Assistance Division (202-564-8273)
Page 10 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
INTRODUCTION
1. OCSPP PROGRAM OVERVIEW
The OCSPP National Program Manager Guidance for FY 2012 represents participatory dialogue
with EPA regional offices, states, tribes and other concerned stakeholders. This Guidance was
also developed with continued and improved coordination with the Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance (OECA) to align program and enforcement priorities, ensure that our
work is mutually supportive and continue to strengthen and focus our joint strategic planning.
The Guidance identifies our FY 2012 program priorities for regional offices summarizes the FY
2012 annual performance plans for each of our national programs managed by the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) and the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), specifies
the specific contributions needed from the regional offices in meeting the goals and objective and
identifies the Annual Commitment System performance measures that will be used to hold
Regional Office programs accountable for contributing.
OPP's core work involves registering pesticides, establishing pesticide tolerances, and
periodically reviewing existing pesticide registrations. OPP regulates pesticide use through
activities such as promulgating rules, approving pesticide labels and labeling, providing guidance
and technical assistance, and working with state/local/federal officials on pesticide enforcement/
compliance issues. OPP priorities include pesticide worker safety, protection of water sources
from pesticide contamination, endangered species protection, hospital disinfectants efficacy, and
implementation of rules such as the Pesticide Container-Containment Rule. Some priorities are
identified in this Guidance for regional action; while others are Headquarters focused but may
require regional engagement with stakeholders.
OPPT ensures the safety of new chemicals entering and existing chemicals already in use in U.S.
commerce, promotes the development and use of safer chemicals and technologies, promotes
pollution prevention as the guiding principle for controlling pollution, and reduces legacy
chemical risks (e.g., childhood lead poisoning) resulting from prior use and practices. OPPT's
long-term strategies and measures are found in Goal 4.1 of the FY 2011 - 2015 EPA Strategic
Plan. As identified in the guidance that follows, EPA's Regional Offices make vital
contributions to several of those strategies: reducing risks from lead-based paint nationally and in
targeted vulnerable populations; reducing risks from PCBs and asbestos; and, promoting
pollution prevention as strategy of first choice in reducing environmental risks and pursuing
sustainability.
2. STRATEGIC PLAN
Goals and Objectives: OCSPP's FY 2012 NPM Guidance describes the key actions needed to
accomplish the public health and environmental goals presented in the FY 2011 - 2015 EPA
Strategic Plan. The Plan identifies the measurable environmental and human health outcomes
the public can expect over the next five years and describes how we intend to achieve those
Page 11 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
results. The Plan represents a commitment to our core values of science, transparency, and the
rule of law in managing our programs.
With the help of states, tribes, and other partners, OCSPP programs in headquarters and the
regional offices support the following:
• Objective 1 of Goal 2 (Protecting America's Waters) - Protect Human Health;
• Objective 1 of Goal 3 (Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable
Development) - Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities;
• Objective 4 of Goal 3 (Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable
Development) - Strengthen Human Health and Environmental Protection in Indian
Country;
• Objective 1 of Goal 4 (Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution) -
Ensure Chemical Safety; and
• Objective 2 of Goal 4 (Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution) -
Promote Preventing Pollution.
Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategies and Administrator Priorities: The FY 2011 - 2015 EPA
Strategic Plan also provides a blueprint for advancing Administrator Lisa Jackson's seven
priorities for protecting human health and the environment. The Plan incorporates the
Administrator's priorities into five cross-cutting fundamental strategies. EPA has developed
Action Plans to implement and advance each of the five strategies. OCSPP is actively engaged in
all five strategies. In particular, two of these cross-cutting fundamental strategies are particularly
relevant to the work of the OCSPP headquarters and Regional Office programs:
Working for Environmental Justice and Children's Health: As outlined in Administrator
Jackson's priorities and detailed in EPA's Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategies, Working
for Environmental Justice and Children's Health, children's health and Environmental Justice
principles should be an intrinsic part of decision-making at every level of the Agency. To
this end, we have integrated children's health and Environmental Justice considerations into
our rulemaking, decision making processes, and program implementation to improve
children's health protection and more effectively address environmental justice concerns.
OCSPP will continue to support and build on existing activities and accomplishments to
ensure policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate risks to children
and other vulnerable populations As such, the Lead Risk Reduction program will assess
disproportionate impacts in minority, low income and indigenous populations of potential
revisions to lead hazard standards and the Chemical Risk Management Program will reach
out to such populations for input in developing and implementing regulations mandated
under Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Act. Similarly, pesticide field programs
listed in this guidance like the Pesticide Worker Safety Program, Bed Bugs, School IPM and
Page 12 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Tribal Programs are specifically targeted to protections of environmental justice communities
and children.
Strengthening State, Tribal and International Partnerships: Both EPA and the states fulfill
critical roles in protecting and improving human health and the environment. By law and
through shared experience, EPA and the states must effectively collaborate in the planning
and implementation of environmental programs and in ensuring compliance with statutory
and regulatory requirements. The current economic challenges facing the states are requiring
the Agency to seriously consider alternate approaches to the current levels of delivery of its
environmental and public health programs. Further, the Administrator has placed renewed
emphasis on improving the Agency's relationships with the states through the FY 2011-2015
Strategic Plan's Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy, Strengthening State, Tribal and
International Partnerships.
OCSPP programs understand that the priorities highlighted in the guidance will require some
flexibility in order to accommodate Regional Office, state, tribal and local concerns on a
region-by-region basis. Accordingly, we will continue to foster innovation and re-engineer
the way we work together to establish common directions for - and ensure the success of-
our programs. To maintain program performance nationally and to ensure the success, the
regional offices and their state partners are encouraged to expand the utilization of work
sharing in achieving their FY 2012 program performance commitments.
This Guidance was developed in collaboration with EPA Regional Offices, states, tribes and
other stakeholders. Several themes were consistent throughout these discussions. First, state
and tribal programs face critical resource constraints. Second, lack of resources has forced
states and tribes to make difficult decisions on which activities they can support - a problem
further exacerbated by increasing workloads. Finally, in recognition of these facts, states,
tribes, and EPA regional offices are unanimous in calling for greater flexibility in the NPM
Guidance to allow for differences in state and geographical priorities.
This Guidance attempts to provide the flexibility states, tribes, and regional offices are
seeking. The document discusses the roles of EPA's headquarters and regional offices,
including the unique role regional offices play in assisting State and Tribal programs in
building program capacity that establishes a framework for Regional Office activities (and by
extension, state and tribal activities) that support Agency goals and objectives.
3. OPPORTUNITIES TO GAIN EFFICIENCY
As noted in OMB Circular No. A-123, "Management's Responsibility for Internal Control," the
first objective of internal controls is to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of operations. In
support of the Administrator's priority to improve EPA's internal operations, OCSPP and
regional offices are continually seeking more efficient and pragmatic ways to achieve our goals
and objectives. EPA's annual NPM Guidance sets forth program priorities and key actions for
the upcoming year, and therefore serve as an important internal control for Agency
programmatic operations.
Page 13 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
The NPM Guidance reflects input from the regional offices, provided through the Agency's lead
Region process, on program risks, vulnerabilities, and actions to reduce these risks. For example,
for several years, OCSPP has employed a GPRA Annual Performance Measure and two Annual
Commitment System (ACS) measures to target improved and maintained efficiency in the
national Lead Risk Reduction program and the Regional Office's processing of lead abatement
worker certification applications with the time frames specified in the application process.
Achieving the ambitious targets for these measures that are part of OCSPP's internal controls
strategy, has required concerted and continuing attention from program managers in headquarters
and the regional offices and has resulted in genuine improvements in program performance that
have directly benefited the program's customers.
4. SUSTAINABILITY
Promoting sustainability, which combines sound environmental practices, economic viability,
and social responsibility, is fundamental to EPA's mission to protect human health and the
environment. OCSPP supports the Administrator's emphasis on sustainability, and will integrate
the concept of sustainability into the Office's chemical safety and pollution prevention programs,
collaborating with other offices and the Regional Offices to maximize the effectiveness on our
sustainability efforts. This approach reflects the need to look at our environmental challenges as
"One EPA" with a whole-systems approach, leveraging cross-program efforts and sharing tools
and information among programs to provide stakeholders with a unified approach to protecting
human health and the environment. More information on EPA's Sustainability efforts can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/sustainability/index.htm.
5. ENHANCED COLLABORATION WITH OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND
COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
Steve Owens, Assistant Administrator for OCSPP, and Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator
for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), are working to enhance
collaboration between the two Offices. Although each Office has a distinct mission, they are
mutually re-enforcing with each program bringing unique tools and expertise to bear on the
common challenge of protecting the public and environment from chemical risks. Important
aspects of this cooperative effort include better aligning the Offices' priorities for Regional
Offices and states, pursuing joint work and exchanging timely and meaningful information on
case development. This coordinated approach will enhance overall program efficiency and
accelerate progress toward achievement of our common strategic objectives.
6. STRENGTHENING STATE GRANTS AND REPORTING
EPA continues to work with States, Tribes and other grant recipients to better align State Grant
Work plan goals and measures outlined in EPA's national goals and performance measures.
These improvements have enhanced the Agency's ability to demonstrate grant results to the
Office of Management and Budget, Congress and the public. It is important that EPA and the
states and tribes build on these efforts to ensure that grant workplans meet the basic requirements
Page 14 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
necessary to ensure that our grants deliver their intended results and to facilitate the integration
of those results into the Agency's strategic and annual planning, budgeting, and accountability
processes. Additional information on grants improvements and the grants management process
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ogd.
In FY 2012, EPA remains committed to strengthening our oversight and reporting of results from
state grants, by linking state grant work plan commitments to EPA's strategic plan, and also
enhancing transparency and accountability. EPA and the states will continue working in FY 12
to achieve this through two related efforts:
State Grant Workplans: The Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD) recently issued Grants
Policy Issuance (GPI) 11-03, "State Grant Workplans and Progress Reports". The GPI was
developed by the State Grant Workplan Workgroup, composed of EPA and State grant
practitioners, and replaces the State Grant Performance Measures Template. To allow
Regions and States sufficient time to adjust to the new requirements, the effective date of the
GPI is October 1, 2012. Based on that effective date, the Agency's goal is to have all covered
grants awarded on or after October 1, 2012 comply with the GPL Regions and States,
however, should begin their planning now to transition to the new approach and, at a
minimum. The GPI should be considered in FY 2012 workplan negotiations. As the policy is
implemented, it will be important for National Program Managers and Regional Program
Offices to provide appropriate outreach, assistance and education to State recipients. In
addition, OGD will work with the Regions on a case-by-case basis to address any
implementation challenges. Please contact Jennifer Bogus in OGD at 202-564-5294 should
you have questions related to the GPI. Please contact the program contact (listed on page 10
of this Guidance) for specific program implementation questions.
State Grant Performance Measures: The current set of measures flagged as State Grant
Template Measures in ACS will be retained for FY 2012 reporting (see Appendix A). As in
FY 2011, the use of the template to capture results for these measures is not required.
However, reporting on the results remains the responsibility of the regional offices and states.
7. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AND ALIGNMENT
OCSPP's suite of Annual Commitment System (ACS) performance measures, presented in
Appendix A, has been refined to align with EPA's revised long-term goals and strategic
measures presented in the FY 2011 - 2015 EPA Strategic Plan and the in EPA's FY 2012
Annual Plan. Attachment B identifies the FY 2012 changes in our priorities, strategies, and
measures since the Final FY 2011 NPM Guidance. The FY 2012 measure commitments in ACS
will remain as draft until final performance agreements are reached in October 2011. Additional
information on the EPA performance measurement, planning and budgeting can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/index.htm. Specific information on the EPA NPM Guidance can
be found at http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/annualplan/fy2012.html.
Page 15 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
OPP REGIONAL OFFICE PROGRAM PRIORITIES
An effective National Pesticide Program, with contributions from OPP, Regions, EPA's Office
of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), and states and tribes, assures protection of
human health and the environment from potential risks associated with pesticide use. Ensuring
that OPP's risk mitigation decisions result in the intended protections requires a strong field
program, and Regions play a key role in this effort. Pesticide Program field activities include
educating end users on proper use, storage, and disposal of pesticides, ensuring proper
implementation of pesticide rules and regulations, and helping states/tribes develop and execute
pesticide programs.
Regions are crucial to assuring the two-way flow of information between EPA and states
necessary for effective risk mitigation. They provide information on pesticide regulatory actions,
guidance, and policies to states and tribes for dissemination to end users, and relay information
from states and tribes to OPP to verify the effectiveness of existing risk mitigation measures and
inform future measures. Regions also support and strengthen state and tribal pesticide programs
by negotiating and providing oversight of cooperative agreements and grants, and providing
technical assistance to these important partners.
To add flexibility, the FY 2012 NPM Guidance has been restructured. The first section contains
two cross-regional priorities requiring activities from all regional offices: 1) Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) in Schools, and 2) Strengthening State and Tribal Partnerships through the
Continued Effective Management of State and Tribal Grants/Cooperative Agreements. The
second section, "Regional-Specific Priority Areas to Strengthen State and Tribal Partnerships
and Programs" contains several activities which support one or more strategic plan objectives
and/or cross-cutting fundamental strategies and OPP goals. Additionally, they all support EPA's
Strategic Plan cross-cutting fundamental strategy of Strengthening State, Tribal and International
Partnerships and Programs. Regions will select at least two priorities from the second section for
special focus and will conduct at least one special project in each area selected. This approach
enables Regions to select priority areas which best address the needs of their states and tribes and
will likely result in the greatest reduction of potential pesticide risk in their area of the country.
For example, soil fumigation may pose greater potential risk in the West, worker protection may
be the most pressing issue in the South, strengthening tribal programs may be a priority in the
Southwest, and implementing the container/containment rule may be most active in the East.
This approach recognizes that while an activity might be a priority for the National Program, the
degree to which that activity is a need in a particular Region may vary. Through this approach,
OPP believes all priority issues will be addressed, and are likely to receive greater attention in
areas of the country where the issue poses the greatest potential risk. It is important to note that
even in areas not identified as cross-regional priorities, or not selected as a specific Regional
priority, Regions are expected to maintain a basic level of technical assistance and support of
state and tribal work and information requests from the public.
Page 16 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
OPP CROSS-REGIONAL PRIORITIES
Two priority activities have been identified as "Cross-Regional" priorities, where each Region
must play a direct role in implementation. The first of these, "IPM in Schools," is a new priority
supporting EPA's strategic plan strategy of "Working for Environmental Justice and Children's
Health," and the strategic plan goal of "Ensuring Chemical Safety." OPP continues to focus on
protecting children and this initiative will reduce the levels of exposure of children to pests and
pesticides.
The second cross-regional priority is "Strengthening State and Tribal Partnerships through the
Continued Effective Management of State and Tribal Grants/Cooperative Agreements." This
priority supports EPA's strategic plan strategy of "Strengthening State, Tribal, and International
Partnerships" and is a core responsibility of regional offices.
1. SCHOOL IPM
Program Description
EPA recognizes that pest control and pesticide use in areas where children are present poses
special challenges and concerns. Additionally, our Nation's children spend a considerable
amount of their time in schools, as do teachers and school support staff The National Center for
Education Statistics estimates that in the fall of 2010, nearly 49.4 million students attended
public elementary and secondary schools, with enrollment rates steadily increasing every year.
With this in mind, EPA is pursuing a program to encourage school officials to adopt integrated
pest management (IPM) practices as a means to reduce exposure to, and risk from pests and
pesticides in schools and on school grounds. The initial focus of this program will be public
schools at the elementary through secondary levels. The goal of this activity is to decrease
exposure of children in public schools (grades K-12) to pests and pesticides through increased
adoption of verifiable and on-going IPM programs in public schools at the elementary through
high school levels.
Principal Activities for the Regional Offices May Include:
1. Issuing grants to develop and implement sustainable school IPM programs.
2. Sponsoring and/or supporting school IPM events.
3. Conducting or funding school IPM training, outreach, and technical assistance to help
schools adopt and implement IPM programs.
4. Providing IPM templates for school districts
5. Conducting outreach to pest management professionals who contract with schools on
School IPM techniques.
Page 17 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
6. Coordinating with other regional programs that target schools.
7. Partnering with other stakeholders implementing IPM in Schools initiatives.
Regional A CS Measures
ACS
Codes
Regional Measure
Unit of
Measure
Comments
IPM1
Number of children in public schools
(grades K-12) currently covered by a
verifiable and ongoing school IPM
program.
Children
In FY 2012, this will be a Non-
Commitment Measure.
Beginning in FY 2013, targets
will be established to increase
the number of children in public
schools (grades K-12) covered
by a verifiable and ongoing
school IPM program.
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
The term "verifiable and on-going IPM programs" will be defined during FY 2011 and agreed
upon prior to the reporting period for this measure. During FY 2012, OPP will begin collecting
appropriate data to track children covered under verifiable school IPM programs. Additional
work will be conducted to develop on-line IPM training for school facility managers and develop
materials that help build an economic/health case for school IPM programs.
2. STRENGTHENING STATE/TRIBAL PARTNERSHIPS THROUGH CONTINUED
EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT GRANTS/COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS
Program Description
Ensuring pesticide regulatory decisions achieve intended protections requires that regulatory
authorities at the state and local level (a) understand those decisions, (b) possess tools to educate
pesticide users about the impact of decisions, and (c) be able to investigate and take action when
decisions are not properly implemented. Regional offices are responsible for negotiating,
implementing, and managing state and tribal cooperative agreements and grants consistent with
the joint OPP/OECA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Cooperative
Agreement Guidance (FIFRA grant guidance). Pesticide Program Cooperative Agreements
ensure state and tribal activities support OPP's goals. EPA grants provide resources to carry out
many of the activities required in the Cooperative Agreements. Regional offices provide
oversight to guarantee resources are directed to areas where they are most needed, and that states
are conducting meaningful work in priority areas. Regions are uniquely positioned to provide
this oversight, given their proximity and working relationships with states and tribes.
Page 18 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Principal Activities for the Regional Offices
1. Negotiating state and tribal cooperative agreements and workplans consistent with the
FIFRA grant guidance.
2. Issuing grant funds to states and tribes in a timely manner once they become available
and/or consistent with the start of the cooperative agreement funding period (unless
another timeframe is negotiated with the grantee).
3. Ensuring end-of-year reporting consistent with the mechanisms and timeframes listed in
the FIFRA grant guidance.
4. Fostering prompt, accurate communication of Pesticide Program regulations, policies,
and guidance to grantees.
5. Providing effective technical assistance and policy support for the grantees.
Examples of Effective Regional Grant Oversight for Pesticide Program Areas
Pesticide Occupational Worker Safety (including Soil Fumigation)
• Encourage states, tribes, and other program stakeholders to participate in the regulatory
development process and contribute information/feedback to EPA as appropriate.
• Prompt states/tribes to evaluate and adopt Certification and Training Assessment Group
(CTAG) recommendations and adopt them as appropriate - including recommendations
for: improving recertification programs, adopting the national core manual and exam, and
considering minimum age requirements for certification of applicators. After issuance of
CTAG recommendations, regional offices should work with states/tribes to evaluate their
appropriateness and encourage implementation. Updated information on CTAG can be
found at http://pep.wsu.edu/ctag/.
• Promote state/tribal use of national worker safety program materials such as the national
core manual and exam, national aerial category materials, WPS train-the-trainer
materials, and other products, to help reduce program costs and promote national
program consistency. Regions should work with states/tribes to identify barriers to
adopting national program materials and discuss ways to address any potential problems.
• Work with states/tribes to support and inform worker safety measures.
• Provide education and outreach to states/tribes and agricultural and commercial pesticide
handling establishments on new risk mitigation labeling requirements being implemented
for the soil fumigants chloropicrin, dazomet, metam sodium, potassium, and methyl
bromide.
Page 19 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Use OPP-developed occupational safety materials to aid education and outreach efforts,
such as fact sheets, standard presentations, inspector checklists, and Q&As when routine
and appropriate opportunities present themselves, such as meetings with state or tribal co-
regulators (e.g., workplan negotiations, mid or end-of-year evaluations, pre-State FIFRA
Issues Research and Evaluation Group (SFIREG) Meetings, regional tribal meetings), site
visits, grower meetings, and applicator programs.
Pesticide Container-Containment Regulation Implementation
Assess whether states and tribes have implementation programs addressing Container-
Containment rule requirements for refillable containers and repackaging and whether the
lead for requirements is with the Region or the state/tribe. This has been on-going during
phase-in of the container-containment regulation. Regions should already have assessed
state/tribal implementation programs for other components of the Container-Containment
rule.
Protection of Water Resources from Pesticide Exposure
Support state and tribal efforts to identify and evaluate pesticides of interest which have
the potential to appear in ground or surface water to see whether a human health or
environmental reference point is likely to be approached or exceeded in localized areas of
a State or Tribe
Assist state/tribal pesticide and water quality management agencies to develop programs
to manage pesticides of concern (derived from pesticides of interest evaluations; i.e.,
those that have a high potential to threaten water quality standards).
Support EPA's pesticide registration review process by collecting and submitting state
water quality monitoring data, including data on CWA §303(d) listed waters due to
pesticide impairments, as described in Cooperative Agreement Guidance.
Page 20 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Regional A CS Measures
ACS
Codes
Regional Measure
Unit of
Measure
Comments
CORE
Percent of overall pesticide program
"core" cooperative agreement activities
that are included in grantee workplans
and completed consistent with the
pesticide program portion of the
FIFRA Grant Guidance.
Percent
completed
Target is 100%. *
Percent of pesticide program
core activities completed by
grantee as compared to the total
required by pesticide program
portion of the FIFRA grant
guidance.
* Note: Where core activities are not completed, they can be removed from the total required
provided a reasonable rationale for not completing the core activity is documented (e.g.,
unexpected loss of staff or unplanned crises during the project period).
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
This measure is intended to show that Regions include required core pesticide program activities
in grantee workplans and conduct the oversight and support needed to help grantees successfully
complete those activities. This measure focuses on core activities since they are required by the
FIFRA Grant Guidance and are essential to maintaining a baseline operation of a program area,
achieving environmental results, and helping support national performance measures (including
providing data related to those measures). While core activities are required to appear in
cooperative agreements, the level of effort and resources devoted may be negotiated depending
on specific needs and priorities of states and tribes.
This measure also recognizes there may be legitimate unanticipated reasons, such as unexpected
loss of staff or technical expertise or unforeseen emergencies, which may prevent grantees from
completing core workplan requirements. Under these circumstances, Regions may agree to
temporarily modify core activities originally included in the workplan. Core activities modified
or not completed due to legitimate unanticipated reasons can be removed from the total required
if a reasonable rationale is documented (e.g., unexpected loss of staff or unplanned crises during
the project period).
Page 21 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
OPP REGION-SPECIFIC PRIORITIES
(Minimum of Two Areas Per Region)
Activities in this section support one or more of EPA's FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan goals and
Strategies. These areas were selected because there is a significant investment of headquarters'
resources and a clear potential for Regional involvement. Unlike the previous section, not every
Region will be required to conduct the activities described in each program area. Regions will
have the flexibility to focus on areas that will have the greatest impact on reducing pesticide risk
in their states and tribal lands. This approach recognizes the critical resource constraints faced by
states and tribes, and that geographic and regional differences impact pesticide use and
regulatory needs. Regions must use the flexibility in this guidance to work with states and tribes
to focus on areas which best meet local objectives, but which also contribute to Agency goals. It
is the intention that even while an issue is not currently a priority in a Region, work conducted
under this guidance might benefit other Regions should the issue become a higher local priority
in the future. For example, the pesticide endangered species program is currently more visible in
Region 10 due to legal activity involving pesticide use in the Northwest, but may become more
important in other Regions in the near future.
It is important to note that while not every Region is required to conduct a "project" in each
program area, regional activities will likely still be required in program areas not selected as a
priority in order to oversee and support cooperative agreements, FIFRA grant guidance, statutory
and regulatory requirements, or respond to public inquiries. Additionally, in order to maintain
Pesticide Program National performance measures, Regions will be required to report on all the
Cross-Regional ACS measures listed at the end of this section regardless of which "Regional
Specific Priority Areas to Strengthen State and Tribal Partnerships and Programs" are selected.
Guidelines for Regional-Specific Priority Areas to Strengthen State and Tribal
Partnerships and Programs
The additional flexibility in NPM Guidance is a significant change from previous years'
guidance. The success of this approach depends on meaningful progress in each area. To achieve
this, Regions must conduct a project in at least two of the following priority areas listed below,
and must ensure that they propose substantive projects for each priority area selected.
Specific priority areas to choose from are:
1. Pesticide Occupational Worker Safety (including Soil Fumigation);
2. Pesticide Container/Containment Regulation Implementation;
3. Protection of Water Resources from Pesticide Exposure (including support for
implementation of the NPDES Pesticide Permits);
4. Expansion of Pesticide Protection in Indian Country;
Page 22 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
5. Bed Bug Outreach/Assistance;
6. Endangered Species Protection; and
7. Antimicrobial Hospital Disinfectants Efficacy and Misbranding.
Several guidelines will apply to the selection of the substantive projects:
1. Each Region must conduct projects in at least two of the priority areas in this section.
(Regions should report their selection of program areas in the comment field for the ACS
measure entitled "Number of Region-specific projects or initiatives contributing to the
implementation and enhancement of the Regional specific priority areas." The number of
this measure is yet to be assigned.)
2. Projects must be designed to enhance the stated goals of the program area selected by the
Region and show meaningful results.
3. Projects may entail outreach, education, training, stakeholder coordination, program
evaluation, state or tribal program capacity building and support, or other similar
project/initiatives that may lead to program improvement.
4. Proposals for projects should include a clear statement of what work will be done, what
the project hopes to accomplish, and how the project will support the goals of the
program areas.
5. Regions are encouraged to set ambitious goals that result in true protections.
6. To help ensure robust projects, OPP and the Regions will review and discuss proposed
projects prior to initiating work.
7. Projects may be designed to be completed in one to three years. Multi-year projects
should have measurable milestones for each year of the project.
8. Projects (or one phase of a multi-year project) must be completed by the end of the fiscal
year. Regions must submit project reports to OPP within 30 days of the end of the federal
fiscal year.
9. The results of each project will be reviewed by OPP and Regions at the end of the fiscal
year and discussed on a conference call or meeting so that innovations and lessons
learned may be shared across the Regions and pesticide program;
10. Project results will be compiled for National Pesticide Program Accomplishment reports.
Page 23 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
1. PESTICIDE OCCUPATIONAL WORKER SAFETY (INCLUDING SOIL
FUMIGATION)
Program Description
Effective implementation of EPA's occupational safety programs is one of OPP's highest
priorities, and a key component of OPP's strategy to ensure the safety of pesticide chemicals,
prevent pollution and advance environmental justice and children's health. The Pesticide Worker
Safety program consists of two important field programs and several key initiatives that are
critical to the protection of human health and the environment through mitigation of occupational
pesticide risks and risks occurring from pesticide applications. These programs include OPP's
agricultural worker protection program, the applicator certification program, the outreach to
health care providers initiative, and several additional initiatives and partner projects that help
promote pesticide safety and prevent or reduce occupational pesticide exposure and incidents.
Addressing occupation risk relies on Regions collaborating with states/tribes, other federal
agencies, industry groups, trade organizations, advocacy groups, community-based
organizations, the regulated community and other program stakeholders in order to reduce the
occurrence of pesticide related incidents in pesticide workers. Reducing risk is accomplished
through a number of mechanisms including proposing modifications, improvements and
enhancements to the worker protection standard and certification and training requirements.
Regions provide assistance by coordinating with states/tribes to ensure the regulated community
is fully informed about requirements in worker safety and certification and training regulations
and that appropriate mechanisms exist and are used to ensure compliance with requirements.
Regions also play a key role in supporting outreach and education programs, supporting pesticide
safety training programs, establishing community-based grant programs, providing outreach to
health care providers that treat pesticide-related illnesses, and employing other innovative
approaches to promote pesticide worker safety.
An issue that may be considered under this program area is implementation of the Amended
Reregi strati on Eligibility Decisions (REDs) for soil fumigant pesticides. In FY 2012, it will be a
priority to provide education and outreach to states/tribes and affected agricultural and
commercial pesticide handling establishments about new risk mitigation labeling requirements
being implemented for the soil fumigants chloropicrin, dazomet, metam sodium, potassium, and
methyl bromide. The RED decisions call for new risk mitigation measures for fumigant handlers
and post-application workers, as well as protections for bystanders. EPA expects fumigant labels
implementing risk mitigation measures will begin to appear in the field in 2011 and 2012.
Ensuring state/tribal officials and fumigant users understand the new label requirements is an
important component of the risk mitigation.
In addition to worker safety program and soil fumigation activities, Regions may include
activities that contribute to the protection of others who may be exposed to pesticides through
their occupations. This may include persons who apply pesticides to lawns and gardens or to
structures including schools and office buildings or private residences.
Page 24 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Environmental Justice
The Pesticide Worker Safety program is critical to assuring that agricultural farmworkers are
protected from occupational pesticide hazards, and it is also a key component of EPA's and
OPP's Environmental Justice (EJ) activities within the pesticide program. According to the most
recent findings of the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS)1, it is estimated that there
are nearly 2 million migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the United States, which represent
some of the most economically disadvantaged people in the U.S. According to the NAWS
report, thirty percent of all farm workers had total family incomes that were below the poverty
guidelines.
Farmworkers provide an important labor service to agriculture, and the abundant and affordable
U.S. food supply benefits greatly from the labor they provide. It is important to protect this
population from occupational pesticide hazards to ensure their safety in the workplace and
viability as a community. EPA's Worker Protection Standards (WPS) provides important
regulatory protections for this population by requiring several safeguards such as training on
recognition of pesticide hazards, protection from pesticide exposure, and emergency assistance
in the event of a pesticide exposure or injury.
Principal Activities for the Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area
1. Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one Region-specific
project/initiative contributing to implementation/enhancement of the worker
protection and/or pesticide applicator certification field programs, or mitigation of
other occupational exposure risks. The goal of a WPS project should be enhanced
protection of agricultural pesticide workers, the goal of a C&T project should be
improved competency of certified pesticide applicators, and the goal of other
occupational exposure risk projects should be enhanced protection of those workers,
including outreach on the new soil fumigant requirements.
2. EPA is nearing completion of revisions to the worker protection standard and
pesticide applicator certification regulations (40 CFR Parts 170 and 171), and expects
publishing proposed rule revisions in December 2011. Headquarters will conduct a
variety of efforts and activities related to these revisions, with Regional participation,
e.g. webinars and other outreach activities. Regions should stay aware of regulatory
development activities and communicate with states, tribes, and other stakeholders
about the status of the process, providing information about the process as needed
when it is updated and made available.
1 Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2001 - 2002. A Demographic and Employment
Profile of United States Farm Workers. U.S. Department of Labor. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy.
Office of Programmatic Policy. Research Report No. 9. March 2005.
Page 25 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
2. PESTICIDE CONTAINER-CONTAINMENT REGULATION IMPLEMENTATION
Program Description
The goal of the pesticide Container-Containment rule implementation is to reduce incidents
associated with occupational exposure or environmental exposure caused by failure, inadequate
storage or improper handling of pesticide containers. The requirements of this rule are designed
to minimize human exposure while handling pesticide containers; reduce the risk of container
disposal and recycling; and protect the environment from pesticide releases at bulk storage sites
and from spills and leaks at refilling and dispensing operations. Successful implementation will
reduce incidents associated with occupational exposure or environmental exposure caused by the
failure, inadequate storage or improper handling of pesticide containers.
This priority area emphasizes OPP and Regional activities to help prepare state partners for
implementation to ensure that requirements of the rule are followed by pesticide registrants,
distributors and users. Compliance was required with non-refillable container and pesticide
containment regulations by August 16, 2009, and with label requirements and refillable container
and repackaging regulations by August 16, 2011. Regions should support state efforts to
implement the new container and containment requirements, and assess whether states have
developed the capacity to implement the regulations. Additional information on the rule can be
found at http://epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/containers.htm.
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area
Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one Region-specific project/initiative
contributing to implementation of the container-containment regulations. The goal of container-
containment Regional projects should be enhancing use of well-designed pesticide containers,
adequate containment for bulk pesticide storage and repackaging activities, and/or proper
handling of pesticide containers. This could involve training state inspectors on the regulations,
conducting outreach to industry within the Region, developing educational or informational
documents on the regulations or other projects.
3. PROTECTION OF WATER SOURCES FROM PESTICIDE EXPOSURE
Program Description
To ensure pesticides do not adversely affect the nation's water resources, EPA will support states
and tribes in conducting a program to: 1) evaluate pesticide risks to local water resources, 2)
take actions to reduce or prevent pesticide contamination of water resources over time, where
potential pesticide risks are identified, and 3) establish mechanisms to demonstrate the progress
of management strategies designed to address water quality concerns caused by pesticide use.
Page 26 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
EPA, states, and tribes will investigate and respond to pesticide water contamination incidents,
especially where water quality standards or other reference points are threatened or exceeded.
OPP, EPA's Office of Water, Regions, states and tribes will share information and collaborate to
identify and manage the risk of pesticide use to water resources. OPP will also use state and
tribal water monitoring data in the pesticide registration and registration review process.
For FY 2012, Pesticide regional offices may be called upon to support development and
implementation of Pesticide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits
issued under the Clean Water Act. Under the current schedule, after October 2011 people who
apply pesticide products to: a) control mosquitoes and other aquatic insect species, b) control
aquatic weeds or algae, c) wide-area pest control and control of vegetation along ditchbanks, and
d) control aquatic animal pests, will be required to operate under an NPDES permit. Within each
Region, Water Program staff will have the lead on this issue but may benefit from guidance,
coordination, or direct assistance from Pesticide Program Regional staff.
Regional Pesticide Programs should offer support in the following areas:
• Where routine opportunities present themselves, provide outreach to potential permittees
in states, tribal areas, and federal facilities that will be covered under the federal Pesticide
General Permit (PGP).
• If still needed, provide technical input to assist Regional Water Program staff review
draft and final state-generated PGPs for states with delegated NPDES authority (e.g.,
providing information related to pesticide use, impacts and/or best management
practices).
• Where routine opportunities present themselves, provide outreach to potential permittees
in states with delegated NPDES authority.
To assist in outreach efforts, Regional Pesticide Program staff will be provided outreach
materials from EPA's Office of Water and/or Regional Water Programs. In addition, to ensure
effective education of the regulated community, steps should be taken to coordinate outreach
opportunities with Regional Water Program staff, Regional Pesticide Program staff, state lead
water agency staff, and state lead pesticide agency staff.
Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), conditions for pesticide
use can include requirements to protect water resources. EPA also provides funding to states and
tribes to protect water resources from pesticides. Under cooperative agreements managed by
EPA regional offices, states and tribes are asked to evaluate pesticides which may threaten water
quality standards or other appropriate reference points, and to place pesticides identified as a
concern under active management to reduce concentrations in the environment that would
otherwise result in undue exposure and risk. This evaluation process allows states and tribes to
focus resources at the local level to manage the greatest risk to their water quality.
Regional work in this area should support state and tribal efforts to ensure the identification and
mitigation over time of water quality concerns due to pesticide use. Regions should also provide
Page 27 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
technical assistance on development and implementation of pesticide NPDES permits issued
under the Clean Water Act and, where routine opportunities present themselves, provide
outreach on NPDES permits to pesticide users potentially covered by the new requirements.
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Ai
1. Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one Region-specific
project/initiative contributing to protection of water sources from pesticide risk.
3. Regions should support the Regional Water Programs in the development and
implementation of Pesticide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits issued under the Clean Water Act in the following areas:
• Where routine opportunities present themselves, provide outreach to potential
permittees in states, territories, tribal areas, and federal facilities that will be
covered under the federal Pesticide General Permit (PGP);
• If needed, provide technical input to assist Regional Water Staff in review of draft
and final state-generated PGPs for states with delegated NPDES authority (e.g.,
providing input on issues related to pesticide use, impacts and/or best
management practices);
• Where routine opportunities present themselves, provide outreach to potential
permittees in states with delegated NPDES authority; and
• To ensure effective education of the regulated community, steps should be taken
to coordinate outreach opportunities with Regional Water Program Staff,
Regional Pesticide Program staff, and state lead water and lead pesticide agency
staffs.
4. EXPANSION AND ENHANCEMENT OF PESTICIDE PROTECTIONS IN INDIAN
COUNTRY
Program Description
The primary goal of the National Pesticide Tribal Program is to help protect human health and
the environment by ensuring pesticides and alternatives are available in Indian country and can
be used according to label directions without causing unreasonable risks. This priority area seeks
to expand protections from pesticide risk by providing pesticide program coverage in Indian
Country and Alaska Native Villages, and to maximize our tribal resources by pursuing policies
and approaches that address the greatest human health and environmental risk concerns from
pesticide use in Indian Country. In addition, this priority area should benefit a number of tribes
rather than just a single tribe. Examples of this kind of "multi-tribal approach" are circuit riders,
Page 28 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
multi-tribal training development of outreach that can benefit many tribes, and support of tribal
organizations dealing with pesticide issues in Indian Country and Alaskan Native Villages.
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area
Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one Region-specific project/initiative which
reduces pesticide risk in Indian Country and Alaska Native Villages. Where appropriate, projects
should seek to benefit multiple tribes. Projects can include working with tribes to develop tribal
Pesticide Use Assessments if this would be valuable in identifying the areas in Indian Country
with the greatest need for tribal pesticide program grants and cooperative agreements; or,
exploring tribal interest in participating in circuit-rider programs either by expanding existing
single tribe programs or establishing new circuit-rider programs or developing pesticide outreach
materials useful to tribes. If there is interest in participating or hosting a circuit-rider program,
and if a circuit-rider program is appropriate for the situations considered, Regions should take
steps to establish these expanded or new circuit-rider programs given available resources.
5. BED BUG OUTREACH/ASSISTANCE
Program Description
Over the last several years bed bug complaints and infestations have increased markedly in some
areas of the country, and the spread of bed bugs infestations are predicted to increase. People
seeking effective, cheap, and rapid solutions have in some cases resorted to the use of
unregistered pesticide products or misuse of registered products. Economically-challenged
segments of the population may be more susceptible due to the relatively high cost of effective
treatment, the presence of multi-family housing, and limited access to information.
EPA's efforts to address bed bugs have focused on: 1) encouraging use of pesticides effective
against bed bugs that do not pose unreasonable risks to people or the environment; 2) promoting
the use of integrated pest management for bed bug control; 3) discouraging the use of
unregistered pesticides or the overuse of registered pesticides as measures to control bed bugs, 4)
providing information to the public on bed bug infestations and 5) collaborating with other
agencies and stakeholders to share information on bed bug control.
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area
1. Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one Region-specific
project/initiative contributing to education about prevention of, or response to, bed
bug infestation, or providing technical assistance to states, tribes, pest management
professionals, local bed bug programs, environmental justice advocates, the general
public, or other stakeholders.
2. Assist OPP in the dissemination of information related to bed bugs and their control.
Page 29 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
3. In order to assure efficient use of resources, Regions should take steps to avoid
duplication of efforts in developing materials, trainings, and meetings by consulting
with the Bed Bug Clearinghouse on EPA's website (a URL will be provided in the
final NPM guidance) and by communicating with OPP and other Regions (such as
through OPP/Regional bedbug conference calls). Where appropriate, Regions should
contribute relevant information to the Bed Bug Clearinghouse and should encourage
states and local agencies to consult and contribute to the clearinghouse as well.
4. Where feasible, Regions should also consider:
• Establishing relationships with other federal, state, and local agencies within the
Region to assist them where needed in their combined bed bug infestation
responses/activities.
• Assisting states in detecting and stopping distribution of unregistered pesticides
intended for use against bed bugs.
• Providing financial assistance to states for bed bug research, outreach, and
education.
6. ENDANGERED SPECIES
Program Description
Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), EPA strives to protect endangered/threatened plants
and animals (listed species) and the habitats upon which they depend. The ESA requires federal
agencies to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out, will not "likely jeopardize"
the continued existence of any listed species, or "destroy or adversely modify" critical habitat of
a listed species. Through risk assessment and mitigation, OPP's goal under the Endangered
Species Protection Program (ESPP) is to limit potential effects from pesticide use to listed
species, while at the same time not placing undue burden on agriculture or other pesticide users.
Through risk assessment and, where necessary, consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife
Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, EPA may identify measures necessary to ensure
no likely jeopardy to listed species. When such measures are geographically specific, the ESPP is
designed to relay such information through Endangered Species Protection Bulletins.
While it is EPA's goal to accomplish its work relative to listed species through ongoing risk
assessments to support the registration review process, the Agency also finds itself conducting
assessments and consultations outside that scope as a result of legal challenges brought against
the Agency. Much attention has been given to the Agency's effects determinations for
endangered species, and the consultation process required of EPA and the Services (National
Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).
Page 30 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Regions should focus on acting as liaison between OPP headquarters office and states/tribes and
pesticide users on potential impacts of pesticide use on threatened and endangered species.
Regions should also continue outreach and education on the ESPP with the goal of increasing
state, tribal, territory, and public knowledge of the program. Where Bulletins are being
developed, Regions play a critical role in facilitating input on proposed limitations and placing
additional emphasis on educating pesticide inspectors.
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area
1. Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one Region-specific
project/initiative contributing to implementation of the Pesticide Program Endangered
Species Program and increased co-regulator and public knowledge about the ESPP.
2. Regions should also assist OPP in disseminating and obtaining review and comment
on ESPP-related information such as draft pesticide risk assessments, measures
recommended by the Services through Biological Opinions, and draft Bulletins,
including crop data, pesticide use data, and the feasibility of proposed mitigation
measures.
7. ANTIMICROBIAL HOSPITAL DISINFECTANT EFFICACY/ MISBRANDING
Program Description
Antimicrobials are used in homes, hospitals, cafeterias, restaurants, and many other institutions.
While all pesticide products are required to function as claimed by the manufacturer, EPA is
particularly concerned about the efficacy of antimicrobial pesticides because their effectiveness
is usually not obvious and inefficacy can have public health implications.
Over the past several years, EPA implemented a comprehensive strategy to ensure the efficacy of
antimicrobial pesticides, placing highest priority on those that have significant public health uses.
Under the Agency's Antimicrobial Testing Program (ATP) a large part of EPA's efforts involve
testing hospital disinfectants and tuberculocides. Under the ATP, product samples collected by
states and regions were evaluated for selected performance claims to ensure they performed as
intended. Current results suggest that approximately thirty percent of the hospital disinfectant
products and about fifty percent of the tubeculocidal products do not meet Agency standards and
a significant number of products fail efficacy testing.
The Agency has undertaken a LEAN review of the ATP, and will be developing a new paradigm
that will focus on a more streamlined and efficient way to register, collect and test hospital
disinfectant and tuberculocidal products and move to bring those that do not meet efficacy
standards back into compliance through the enforcement and regulatory process. This will entail
coordination and collaboration between the Office of Pesticides Programs, the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, the Office of General Council and the Regions.
Page 31 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
In FY 2012, Regions should be working with OECA and OPP on sample collection for new
antimicrobial hospital disinfectant products, products not previously tested, or products which
require additional follow-up for enforcement or regulatory purposes. Regions should also be
working with OPP and OECA on other products that are deemed high priority for testing.
Regions should work with OECA on enforcement actions when products fail the ATP, and
inform OPP and other regions concerning any enforcement actions related to ATP.
Principal Activities for Regional Offices Selecting this Priority Area
1. Regions emphasizing this area must conduct at least one region-specific
project/initiative contributing to implementation of the ATP and increased public
knowledge about the safe and effective use of hospital disinfectants.
2. Regions will be working with OECA and states to collect products for testing.
Regions will also be following up on product failures, using enforcement mechanisms
where warranted, and notifying OPP and other regions where enforcement actions are
taken.
3. As the ATP progresses, Regions can expect an increase of questions relating to the
Program and the efficacy of hospital disinfectants and tuberculocides. Regions should
provide outreach on the ATP and hospital disinfectants to users, distributors and
others based on materials provided by OPP (e.g., the ATP website at,
http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/antimicrobial-testing-program.html). These outreach
opportunities should occur where there are appropriate and existing opportunities.
4. Regions should report back to the Office of Pesticide Program Antimicrobial Division
any questions that are not answered by the available materials. This will help OPP
identify whether additional communication materials need to be developed.
Regional ACS Measures
ACS
Codes
RSP1
Regional Measure
Number of Region-specific projects or
initiatives contributing to the implementation
and enhancement of the Regional specific
priority areas.
Unit of
Measure
Projects or
initiatives
Comments
The target will be two (one
from each Regional specific
priority area selected).
Regions should specify the
Regional-Specific Priority
Areas the projects support in
the comment field in ACS.
Page 32 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
26
Total number of certified applicators.
Certified
applicators
State Grant Performance
Measure.
Regions should report the
number of certified
applicators for each state in
their Region in the comment
field.
TR-2
Number of tribes covered under tribal
pesticide program and/or enforcement grants
and cooperative agreements for continuing
environmental programs established since FY
2005 in Indian Country.
Tribes
Non-Commitment Measure
TR-3
Number of people covered under tribal
pesticide program and/or enforcement grants
and cooperative agreements for continuing
environmental programs established since FY
2005 in Indian Country
People
Non-Commitment Measure
TR-4
Number of acres covered under tribal
pesticide program and/or enforcement grants
and cooperative agreements for continuing
environmental programs established since FY
2005 in Indian Country
Acres
Non-Commitment Measure
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
Each Region must report on each of the ACS measures regardless of which Regional specific
priority area is selected.
ACS Measure 26 "Total Number of Certified Applicators:" Certification of applicators helps
ensure that applicators are competent to handle and apply restricted use pesticides with minimum
potential risk to human health and the environment. It is our first line of risk mitigation for the
most hazardous pesticides on the market.
There are several important caveats to this measure which should be noted:
• There are varying state/tribal requirements for who is required to be certified in each state
or area of Indian country, especially for commercial applicator certification. So the total
number of applicators requiring certification can vary greatly depending on state/tribal
laws and regulations.
• The total number of certified applicators per state or area of Indian country is not based
on or directly related to federal certification requirements or funding.
Page 33 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
• Total number of applicators requiring certification in each state or area of Indian country
can also vary depending on, population, level of agricultural production, pest pressures,
certification costs, and other factors.
The total number of certified applicators by state/tribe will be obtained from states/tribes as part
of certification program requirements established in 40 CFR 171(d). After validation of the
number of certified applicators for each state, OPP will provide that data to each region for entry
into ACS (OPP does not have system rights to enter this data, so it must be entered by the
Regions). Also note that since this data is not required under the grant guidance until December
31, and must undergo a process of validation, data for this ACS measure will not be available at
the end of the fiscal year for reporting into ACS. When regions report their ACS measures at the
end of the fiscal year, they may indicate in the comment filed for this measure that this data will
not be available until February/March and will be reported at that time.
Page 34 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
OPPT PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REGIONAL OFFICES PRIORITIES
OPPT ensures the safety of new chemicals entering and existing chemicals already being used in
U. S. commerce, reduces risks associated with legacy chemicals (e.g., lead, PCBs, asbestos)
remaining from prior practices, promotes the development and use of safer chemicals and
technologies, and promotes pollution prevention as the guiding principle for reducing pollution.
OPPT's long-term strategies and measures are found in Goal 4.1 of the FY 2011 - FY 2015 EPA
Strategic Plan. As identified in the guidance that follows, EPA's Regional Office make vital
contributions to several of those strategies: reducing risks from lead-based paint nationally and in
targeted vulnerable populations; reducing risks from other high-concern chemicals; and,
promoting pollution prevention as the strategy of first choice in reducing environmental risks and
pursuing sustainability. For more information about OPPT's programs, go to
http ://www. epa.gov/opptintr/.
1. LEAD RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM
Program Description
Recent data show significant progress in the continuing effort to eliminate childhood lead
poisoning as a public health concern. EPA has historically measured progress by tracking
reductions in the number of children with elevated blood lead levels of 10 micrograms per
deciliter or higher. Data released in 2010 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
indicates that the incidence of childhood lead poisoning has declined from approximately 1.6
percent of children in 2002 to 0.9 percent of children in 2006. These results show that the
federal government is making greater than expected progress and well on track toward achieving
its goal of eliminating childhood lead poisoning as a public health concern, at those blood levels,
by 2010. However, given the low number of children with blood lead levels of 10 micrograms
per deciliter or higher as reported in the CDC data, it is statistically impossible to continue to
provide an estimate of that number.
Results of recent studies indicate adverse health effects to children at blood levels lower than 10
micrograms per deciliter. In response to this new information and the fact that the potential for
exposure posed by lead-based paint still exists in approximately 38 million homes built before
1978, EPA now is targeting reductions in the number of children with blood lead levels of 5
micrograms per deciliter or higher. The lead program also tracks the disparities in blood lead
levels between low-income children and non-low-income children. The program uses these
performance measures to track progress toward eliminating childhood lead poisoning in
vulnerable populations.
EPA's Lead Risk Reduction program contributes to the goal of eliminating childhood lead
poisoning by:
Page 35 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
• Establishing standards governing lead hazard identification and abatement practices and
maintaining a national pool of professionals trained and certified to implement those
standards;
• Providing information to housing occupants so they can make informed decisions and
take actions about lead hazards in their homes;
• Establishing work practice standards and training and certification requirements for lead-
based abatement, inspection and risk assessment activities and for renovation, repair and
painting projects in homes and child-occupied facilities with lead-based paint; and,
• Establishing a national pool of certified firms and individuals who are trained to carry out
renovation and repair and painting projects while adhering to the lead-safe work practice
standards and to minimize lead dust hazards created in the course of such projects.
Environmental Justice
The Lead Risk Reduction Program advances Environmental Justice through its FY 2015
Strategic Measure and FY 2012 Annual Performance Measures to reduce disparities in blood
lead levels between low-income children and non-low-income children. While none of the
program's FY 2012 Annual Commitment System measures specifically track these national
measures due to the fact that the data support them cannot be broken down at the regional or
state levels, all of the Program's activities, including all activities conducted by the Regional
Offices, support achievement of its Environmental Justice mission.
For more information see http://www.epa.gov/lead.
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices
The Lead Risk Reduction program FY 2012 Activities and Performance Plan proposed in EPA's
FY 2012 President's Budget can be found at http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/. Regional
Office activities proposed to be conducted in FY 2012 implementing that plan include:
1. Implement lead-based paint risk reduction education, outreach and regulatory
implementation programs in target areas with high concentrations of children with
elevated blood levels.
2. Continue overseeing the Section 404(g) grant program to maintain a trained
workforce of certified lead-based paint professionals and certified renovation firms in
authorized states and continue operating these programs in non-authorized states,
ensuring that 100% of grant funds are obligated within the first fiscal year of
appropriation.
3. Provide outreach for Pre-Renovation Education Rule (406) and Disclosure Rule
(1018).
Page 36 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
4. Support the Training and Certification Rule 402(a), in EPA States and Tribes; and
coordinate with State and Tribal programs, as needed, for 402(a) rule compliance
assistance in authorized states.
5. Create opportunities for partnerships to address lead-based paint hazards and
exposure reduction. For example, utilize the Indian Health Service Environmental
Health Office to accommodate Tribes in this area by performing lead-based testing in
sensitive areas where children are prone to 8-hour activity.
6. Implement the Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule
including: providing Section 404(g) grants to States, Tribes, and territories to develop
and carry out authorized programs; working with States, Tribes, and territories to
encourage successful delegation of the rule; accrediting qualified training providers;
providing information and compliance assistance to firms and other regulated parties;
providing effective public outreach so that demand for qualified RRP contractors is
strong; and, ensuring that 100% of grant funds are obligated within the first fiscal
year of appropriation.
7. Coordinate implementation of Lead Program activities with OECA's implementation
of compliance assistance, monitoring and enforcement strategies encompassing the
full suite of lead regulations, as articulated in OECA's TSCA Compliance Monitoring
Strategy.
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures
ACS
Code
Regional Offices Measure
Unit of
Measure
Comments
13A
Annual percentage of viable lead-based paint
abatement certification applications that require
less than 20 days of EPA Regional Office effort
to process (For Direct Implementation -
Regional Office efforts)
Percent
Directly supports
GPRA annual
performance measure.
13B
Annual percentage of viable lead-based paint
abatement certification applications that require
less than state-established timeframes to
process (for authorized States).
Percent
State Grant
Performance Measure
14
Number of lead abatement activities performed
by certified abatement workers occurring in the
Region.
Abatement
Non-Commitment
Measure
RRP2
Number of training providers for lead-based
paint renovation, repair and painting accredited
by the Regional Office.
Training
Providers
Non-Commitment
Measure
Page 37 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
TR-l
Number of tribal partnerships addressing lead-
based paint hazards and exposure reduction.
Partnerships
Non-Commitment
Measure
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
An internal measures workgroup comprised of Regional Office and Headquarter (HQ)
management and staff developed the suite of measures reflected in the table above. The
measures were approved by the Regional Division Directors and are described below. These
refined measures better reflect work currently done in Regional Offices by more
comprehensively describing how Regional Office activities are supportive of the overall
programmatic goals.
ACS measure 14 is a measure which looks to measure the number of abatements that occur
within each state. The measure will provide valuable information on the true impact of the
abatement contractors certified by EPA and the authorized programs.
ACS measure 13A examines the efficiency of the Regional Offices as they process viable
individual abatement certification applications. EPA Regional Offices are measured on the
number and percentage of individual certification applications processed in less than 20 calendar
days. This measure is calculated by using two timeframes. Timeframe 1 is the number of days
elapsed from the "Sent to Regional Office" date (when the contractor sends the application to the
Regional Office) to the "Regional Office Review" date (when the Regional Office enters its
recommendation to approve/disapprove.) Timeframe 2 is the number of days from the
"Approval or Disapproval Letter Generated" date entered by the Regional Office to the "Final
Package Sent" date entered by the Regional Office.
Timeframes 1 and 2 are added together to give the total processing time. These two timeframes
do not include time from any other federal Lead-based Paint Program (FLPP) process and
specifically exclude any time associated with fee confirmation. All of the dates discussed are
only valid if recorded in FLPP, and the date recorded in FLPP is the date that these activities are
checked off in the database. For example, if a final package is mailed to an applicant on
September 1, and then two weeks later (on September 15) the Regional Office staff enters FLPP
to update the database, and clicks the "Final Package Sent" radio button for that application, the
September 15 date is entered into FLPP as the date the final package is was sent (rather than the
actual September 1 date). This cannot be overridden, so be sure to enter your progress on the
day that you accomplish each action.
ACS measure 13B is a state grant performance measure which examines the efficiency of
authorized Grantee-States as they process viable abatement certification applications within the
Grantee-State established timeframes. Regional Offices should ensure that their respective states
achieve the minimum planning target, stated as the Regional Office bid. The Regional Offices
will use the comment field to report their authorized Grantee-State timeframes (number of days
taken by Grantee-State to process a viable application) for each shareholder (State or Tribe) and
the percentage of applications processed under the Grantee-State established timeframe. The
Page 38 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
timeframe may vary by State, taking variables such as regulations and contractor processing time
into account. The number agreed upon should be a reasonable determination that reflects the
length of time that it takes the Grantee-State to process an application, as identified by the
Grantee-State and represented to the public. Below is an example of the information that should
be reported by the Regional Offices in the comment field.
Shareholder
AL
GA
KY
MS
NC
TN
Timeframe (calendar days)
25
20
20
10
20
60
% Processed within timeframe
72.5
75
72
75
72
100
ACS measure RRP2 is a non-commitment measure which captures the number of training
providers for lead-based paint Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) accredited by the each
Regional Office. The measure will provide valuable information on the true impact of the
accredited training providers certified by EPA and the authorized programs. Ensuring an
adequate workforce of accredited training providers is one important aspect for the success of the
RRP program.
ACS measure TR-1 is a continuing non-commitment measure which tracks the number of tribal
partnerships or other projects addressing lead-based paint hazards and exposure reduction on
tribal lands. Tribal partnerships are a more focused subset of overall lead partnerships.
Examples of tribal partnerships or projects include: Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative
Agreements (DITCAs), on-going projects, outreach, DITCA related activities, cooperative
agreements, formal agreements, tribal grants, Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs), etc.
2. CHEMICAL RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Program Description
The Chemical Risk Management (CRM) Program supports national programs aimed at
mitigating chemical risk and exposure through reductions in use and safe removal, disposal and
containment of certain prevalent, high-risk chemicals, known generally as legacy chemicals.
Some of these chemicals were used widely in commerce and introduced into the environment
before their risks were known. The CRM Program currently focuses on providing assistance to
Page 39 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
federal agencies and others with responsibility for ensuring proper use of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) and limiting exposures to them in buildings such as schools, reducing or
eliminating the use of products containing mercury, and implementing statutory requirements to
address asbestos risks in schools.
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices
The Chemical Risk Management program FY 2012 Activities and Performance Plan proposed in
EPA's FY 2012 President's Budget can be found at http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/.
Regional Office activities proposed to be conducted in FY 2012 implementing that plan include:
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
1. Provide assistance to schools when requested in assessing presence of PCBs in caulk
and other sources.
2. Promote education and outreach efforts on PCBs in schools, especially with materials
recently developed. As an example, education and outreach activities can be
delivered to any of the following: Local Educational Authorities (LEAs), School
Districts/Boards, individual schools (including charter schools), principals, PTAs
(including individual parents and teachers), maintenance workers, and individual
students. This education and outreach can be accomplished through any of the
following mechanisms: web products, written publications (fact sheets, booklets,
reports), public meetings, conferences, exhibits, community outreach, training
sessions, award programs, mass mailings (electronic or postal), and phone.
Asbestos
1. Maintain education and outreach efforts to bring schools into Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act (AHERA) compliance.
2. Promote education and outreach efforts, especially with materials recently develop.
As an example, education and outreach activities can be delivered to any of the
following: Local Educational Authorities (LEAs), school districts/boards, individual
schools (including charter schools), principals, PTAs (including individual parents
and teachers), maintenance workers, and individual students. This education and
outreach can be accomplished through any of the following mechanisms: web
products, written publications (fact sheets, booklets, reports), public meetings,
conferences, exhibits, community outreach, training sessions, award programs, mass
mailings (electronic or postal), and phone calls.
3. Work with asbestos training providers to ensure compliance with requirements.
Page 40 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures
ACS
Code
Regional Offices Measure
Unit of
Measure
Comments
ISA
Number of children reached through outreach
activities (e.g., public meetings, conferences,
exhibits, community outreach, training, award
programs, mass mailings, phone calls, etc.)
conducted to address asbestos.
Children
15B
Number of outreach products produced (e.g.,
web products, written publications (fact sheets,
booklets, reports), exhibits, training packages,
mass mailings (electronic or U.S. postal mail))
addressing asbestos.
Products
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
ACS measure ISA seeks to track the number of children reached through outreach activities as
well as identifying the type of activities utilized by the Regional Office. The Regional Offices
will use the ACS comment field to report the outreach activities they coordinated to reach the
targeted number of children.
ACS measure 15B seeks to track the number of products produced by the Regional Office that
will partially generate the outputs in measure ISA. Product development is distinct from using
products in outreach efforts and merits recognition through ACS.
Example 1: Region G reported that they reached 250,000 school children by participating in 3
distinct activities. This would be reported as 250,000 for measure 15A and 3 for measure 15B.
Example 2: Region Q participated in 6 Local Educational Authorities (LEA) designee
workshops, providing specific briefings on the AHERA program requirements. Workshops
occurred in Bath, NY; Neversink, NY; Result, NY; Surprise, NY; Brick, NJ; and Good Intent,
NJ where 75,000 school children were reached. 75,000 would be reported in measure 15A and
the 6 workshops would be reported for measure 15B.
Example 3: Region R developed a brochure and a training video on implementing AHERA and
ASHARA requirements, and disseminated those products to 20 school systems enrolling a total
of 10,000 students. 10,000 would be reported in measure 15A and 2 would be reported under
15B.
Page 41 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
3. CHEMICAL RISK REVIEW AND REDUCTION PROGRAM
Program Description
The Chemical Risk Review and Reduction (CRRR) program is responsible for ensuring the
safety of the thousands of chemicals already existing in commerce before the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) took effect as well as preventing the introduction into commerce of new
chemicals that pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. Key program efforts
include:
• Taking regulatory and non-regulatory actions to eliminate or significantly reduce risks
posed by existing chemicals of concern, assessing existing chemicals to identify such
concerns, and obtaining and making public to the maximum extent allowed by law the
data needed to conduct such assessments and support risk management actions; and
• Reviewing and acting on approximately 1,100 TSCA Section 5 notices, including Pre-
Manufacture Notices (PMNs), received annually to ensure that no unreasonable risk is
posed by new chemicals before they are introduced into U.S. commerce.
Immediately upon appointment to lead EPA, Administrator Jackson embarked on a fundamental
transformation of EPA's approach for ensuring chemical safety to make significant and long
overdue progress in protecting human health and the environment. The need for such a
transformation was made clear when the Government Accountability Office (GAO) identified
EPA's processes for assessing and controlling toxic chemicals as a high-risk area in need of
transformation in its January 2009 High-Risk Series. GAO concluded that EPA's ability to
protect public health and the environment depends on credible and timely assessment of the risks
posed by toxic chemicals. Such chemical assessments, GAO stated, are the cornerstone of much
needed, scientifically sound environmental decisions, policies, and regulations under TSCA and
other statues. There are approximately 2,900 High Production Volume (HPV) chemicals in
commerce that are produced at over 1,000,000 Ibs per year and an additional approximately
3,300 chemicals produced at over 25,000 Ibs per year. EPA is committed to assessing these
chemicals for risk and taking regulatory action to eliminate or significantly reduce risks.
FY 2012 represents a crucial stage in this transformation. This budget request will allow EPA to
make substantial progress so EPA is transitioning from an approach dominated by voluntary data
submissions by industry, to a more aggressive action-oriented approach for ensuring chemical
safety through four areas of focus:
• Using all available authorities under TSCA to take immediate and lasting action to
eliminate or reduce identified chemical risks and develop safer alternatives;
• Using regulatory mechanisms to fill remaining gaps in critical exposure and health and
safety data for chemicals already in commerce and increasing transparency and public
access to information on TSCA chemicals;
Page 42 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
• Using data from all available sources to conduct detailed chemical risk assessments on
priority chemicals to inform the need for and support development and implementation of
risk management actions; and,
• Preventing introduction of unsafe new chemicals into commerce.
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices
No Regional Offices activities are proposed for FY 2012 under the CRRR Program due to the
absence of direct resources allocated to Regional Offices under this Program/Project. The
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction program FY 2012 Activities and Performance Plan
proposed in EPA's FY 2012 President's Budget can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/.
4. POLLUTION PREVENTION
Program Description
The Pollution Prevention Program (P2) is one of EPA's primary tools for encouraging
environmental stewardship by federal and state governments, industry, communities, and
individuals. The P2 program is designed to eliminate or reduce waste at the point of generation
by encouraging cleaner production processes and technologies; promoting the development and
use of safer, "greener" materials and products; and supporting the implementation of improved
practices such as the use of conservation techniques, and the reuse of materials in lieu of their
placement into the waste stream. As a result of the P2 program, EPA and its partners have
achieved significant reductions in the use of hazardous materials, energy and water; reductions in
the generation of greenhouse gases; savings in production, operation and waste management
costs; and increases in the use of safer chemicals and products. These efforts will strengthen the
mission of the Agency by advancing the Administrator's priorities to take action on climate
change and reduce chemical risks. The P2 Program is augmented by a counterpart P2 grant
program in the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) account. The program accomplishes
its mission through several centers of results, including those described below.
For more information about EPA's Pollution Prevention Program, see http://www.epa.gov/p2/.
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices
1. Administer the P2 State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program to fund state
P2 technical assistance programs and regional P2Rx Centers, which assist businesses
in ways that contribute significantly to the Agency achieving its P2 strategic targets,
ensuring that 100% of STAG funds are obligated within the first year of
appropriation. Identify and work with the states and tribes and EPA Headquarters to
replicate successful pilots for maximum national impact.
Page 43 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
2. Administer the Source Reduction Assistance grant program to fund state P2 technical
assistance programs and regional P2Rx Centers, which assist businesses in ways that
contribute significantly to the Agency achieving its P2 strategic targets. Identify and
work with the states and tribes and EPA Headquarters to replicate successful pilots
for maximum national impact.
3. Promote multi-media coordination with (air, water, waste, and toxics programs)
within each region to promote P2/sustainability outcomes.
4. Provide direct P2 technical assistance to businesses, governments and organizations
to advance P2 program goals.
5. Continue to engage in the comparative analysis and development of a tool to improve
the collection, tracking and reporting of P2 Grant Results.
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures
ACS
Code
262
263
264
297
Regional Offices Measure
Gallons of water reduced through pollution
prevention.
Business, institutional and government costs
reduced through pollution prevention.
Pounds of hazardous material reduced through
pollution prevention.
Annual metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2e) reduced, conserved or
offset through pollution prevention.
Unit of
Measure
Gallons
Dollars
Pounds
MTCO2e
Comments
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
In FY 2010 the P2 Program transit!oned to using measures that are calculated using new annual
results (as at present) plus recurring results (capturing continuing results in out-years for the
lifespan of the P2 improvement). This will avoid under-counting the impacts of P2 Program
interventions, and is consistent with feedback received from the Science Advisory Board in
September 2008. The P2 Program at Headquarters discussed with the Regional Offices how long
recurring results will be counted for regional interventions. Computing recurring results for
regional interventions will be a Headquarters responsibility.
For all Pollution Prevention measures, "reduced" is defined to mean reduction through P2
improvements and includes pollution avoided. .An example of "avoiding" pollution would be
substituting a less hazardous chemical instead of a more hazardous chemical.
Page 44 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
The pollution "reduced" and "avoided" must be related to source reduction, and not out-of-
process recycling. The P2 Program considers the reuse of materials as source reduction, not out-
of-process recycling, because reuse occurs before material is discarded. Out-of-process
recycling involves waste haulers picking up material after it has been discarded.
When considering material reuse from a grant or program measurement perspective, it is helpful
to remember that the P2 Program places a priority on preventing hazardous pollution over non-
hazardous pollution. The reuse of hazardous materials would allow counting any associated life-
cycle benefits towards annual targets for reductions in (virgin) hazardous materials, energy
use/GHG emissions, water use, and costs. The reuse of nonhazardous materials, on the other
hand, could not serve as a primary purpose of a P2 grant, nor would it allow reporting benefits
towards annual targets for reductions in hazardous materials or dollar costs. If the reuse of
nonhazardous materials is ancillary to primary P2 activities under a grant, however, Regional
Offices should report the greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions associated with reusing those
nonhazardous materials. These GHG reductions would otherwise go unreported and the GHG
reduction measure is defined broadly and without hazardous material limitations. For that
matter, GHG reductions from ancillary out-of-process recycling activities undertaken in
conjunction with P2 implementation activities should also be counted, for the same reason.
Reduced, conserved and offset collectively cover activities that result in less combustion of fossil
fuels. This can occur by using fossil fuel energy more efficiently, simply using less fossil fuel
energy, or switching to an energy source with a lower fossil fuel impact. For further details and
examples, consult the P2 Measurement Guidance.
ACS measure 262 is a commitment measure that counts the gallons of water reduced as a result
of water conservation. What is counted is the reduced use of water in the first place. This can be
accomplished through conservation and re-use of water. If water pollution is reduced, the
gallons of water associated with the pollutant effluent are not counted under this measure. For
example, if a facility used a million gallons of water in the previous year and uses only 500,000
gallons of water in the reporting year, they can count 500,000 gallons of water conserved under
ACS measure 262.
ACS measure 263 is a commitment measure that counts the amount of money saved as a result
of the incorporation of pollution prevention practices into the daily operations of government
agencies, businesses, and institutions. Institution is defined as an established organization,
especially of a public character (e.g., hospitals, universities, group purchasing organization, etc).
The P2 Program, in consultation with the Pollution Prevention Resource Center (PPRC), has
updated the financial cost calculator which provides specific cost savings for specific types, of
pollutants as well as water and energy conservation. Further details and examples can be found
in the P2 Measurement Guidance.
ACS measure 264 is a commitment measure that counts the reduction of hazardous material
released to air, water, land, or incorporated into products, or used in an industrial process.
Hazardous is used in a broad sense to include federally or state regulated pollutants, including
Clean Air Act criteria pollutants and Clean Water Act water quality criteria pollutants and
conventional pollutants, but excludes items generally considered of low hazard and frequency
Page 45 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
recyclable or divertible, such as paper products, cans, iron and steel scrap, and construction
waste.
ACS measure 297 is a commitment measure that counts the metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2e) reduced, conserved or offset. The P2 Program has developed a
Greenhouse Gas Reductions Calculator that is being made available for Regional Office use to
compute the conversion of electricity, fuels, BTUs, and chemicals to MTCO2e for reporting
purposes.
Page 46 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
OPPT CROSS-REGIONAL OFFICES PROGRAM ACTIVITY:
COMMUNITY ACTION FOR A RENEWED ENVIRONMENT (CARE)
Program Description
Through the CARE program, EPA provides funding tools and technical support that enable
underserved communities to create collaborative partnerships to take effective actions to address
local environmental problems. The National Academy of Public Administration (NAP A) issued
a positive evaluation of the CARE program in May 2009 observing ".. .the CARE program
complements EPA regulatory strategies with place-based strategies—strategies that consider the
local context in which environmental decisions are made and effects are felt. The Panel believes
that the CARE approach represents a "next step" in environmental improvement and protection."
Since 2005, CARE grants have reached 81 communities in 39 states and territories with over
1,700 partners engaged for a total of $14 million in grants. Through 2009, combined, CARE
communities have: leveraged an additional $12M in funding with local partners providing an
additional $2 million in-kind services; visited over 4,000 homes providing information and/or
environmental testing; worked to reduce risks in almost 300 schools and provided environmental
information to over 2,800 businesses and 50,00 individuals.
CARE delivers funding through cooperative agreements. In the smaller Level I agreements, the
community, working with EPA, creates a collaborative problem-solving group of community
stakeholders. That group assesses the community's toxic exposure, environmental problems and
priorities, and begins to identify potential solutions. In the larger Level II agreements, the
community, working with EPA, selects and funds projects that reduce risk and improve the
environment in the community.
CARE is a cross-Agency program that depends on strong collaboration between all the NPMs
and between headquarters and Regional Offices. The CARE Executive Team (comprised of
senior management from HQ and Regional Offices) guides the program. Eleven cross-Agency
headquarter/Regional Offices teams manage the program. The Regional Offices coordinate
across their offices to meet the needs of specific communities. This collaboration is essential in
ensuring that communities have access to all of EPA voluntary programs and other resources and
tools from across the Agency. CARE also coordinates with CDC/ATSDR, HUD, USD A, and
other federal Agencies to better meet communities' needs.
Proposed Principal Activities for the Regional Offices
1. Provide multi-media regional support needed to ensure the success of the region's
CARE cooperative agreements.
2. Identify experienced project officers/leaders for each of the CARE projects and
provide training and support as needed.
Page 47 of 48
-------
OCSPP FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
3. Strengthen cross program regional team organized to support CARE project leaders
and CARE community needs with dedicated technical and programmatic support.
4. During CARE Level I projects, project officers help provide the technical support
needed for communities to identify and rank their risks and build long-term, viable
partnerships..
5. During CARE Level II projects, project officers help communities' access EPA
programs and expertise to create and implement local solutions and measure and track
their results.
6. Encourage staff participation in training new project leaders and at sessions during
the national CARE workshop.
7. Ensure required reporting of progress and results through the Quarterly and End of
Year Reports and assist in other efforts to aggregate program results on a national
level.
8. Support work to capture best practices and lessons learned to help other communities
replicate these approaches.
9. Support CARE national teams that have been organized to manage the CARE
program and provide support to Regional Office teams and projects.
Proposed Regional Offices ACS Measures
ACS
Code
Regional Offices Measure
Unit of
Measure
Comments
CARE1
Number of Community Action for Renewed
Environment (CARE) cooperative
agreement projects managed in order to
obtain toxic reductions at the local level.
Cooperative
Agreement
Definitions and Clarification of Measures
ACS measure CAREl seeks to track the number of CARE projects managed by the Regional
Office. The CARE measure was developed as an inherently duplicative measure and other
NPMs will have similar CARE measures. The Regional Offices will use the ACS comment field
to report the CARE cooperative agreement projects and will report the same information if
another NPM has a similar CARE measure.
Page 48 of 48
-------
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
ATTACHMENT A: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
G/O/S
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
Measures
Central
Code
IPM1
CORE
RSP2
26
Measure Text
Number of children in public schools (grades K-12)
currently covered by a verifiable and ongoing school
IPM program.
Percent of overall pesticide program "core"
cooperative agreement activities that are included in
grantee workplans and completed consistent with the
pesticide program portion of the FIFRA Grant
Guidance.
Number of Region-specific projects or initiatives
contributing to the implementation and enhancement
of the Regional specific priority areas.
r\
Total number of certified applicators.
Non-
Corn mitment
Indicator (Y/N)
Y
N
N
N
State Grant
Performance
Measure (Y/N)
N
N
N
Y
Planning Target
lOO^o1
2 per Region
National Target
(FY2012 Pres.
Bud)
1 Where core activities are not completed, they can be removed from the total required provided a reasonable rationale for not
completing the core activity is documented (e.g., unexpected loss of staff or unplanned crises during the project period).
9
There are varying state requirements for who has to get certified in each state, especially for commercial applicator certification, so
the total number of applicators requiring certification in each state can vary greatly depending on state laws and regulations. The total
number of certified applicators per state is not based on or directly related to federal certification requirements or funding.
The total number of applicators certified by a state is not within their control and is not a function of their efficiency or productivity.
States have different populations, levels of agricultural production, pest issues, costs to obtain certification, and regulatory
requirements for certification. This may affect the number of people who pursue certification and the total number of applicators
certified by a state.
A TTACHMENTA: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
Page 1
-------
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
ATTACHMENT A: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
G/O/S
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
Measures
Central
Code
TR-2
TR-3
TR-4
13A
13B
14
Measure Text
Number of tribes covered under tribal pesticide
program and/or enforcement grants and cooperative
agreements for continuing environmental programs
established since FY 2005 in Indian Country.
Number of people covered under tribal pesticide
program and/or enforcement grants and cooperative
agreements for continuing environmental programs
established since FY 2005 in Indian Country
Number of acres covered under tribal pesticide
program and/or enforcement grants and cooperative
agreements for continuing environmental programs
established since FY 2005 in Indian Country
Annual percentage of viable lead-based paint
abatement certification applications that require less
than 20 days of EPA Regional Office effort to
process (For Direct Implementation - Regional
Office efforts).
Annual percentage of viable lead-based paint
abatement certification applications that require less
than state-established timeframes to process (For
authorized States).
Number of lead abatement activities performed by
certified abatement workers occurring in the Regions.
Non-
Corn mitment
Indicator (Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
State Grant
Performance
Measure (Y/N)
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Planning Target
National Target
(FY2012 Pres.
Bud)
A TTACHMENTA: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
Page 2
-------
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
ATTACHMENT A: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
G/O/S
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
3/4
4.2
4.2
4.2
Measures
Central
Code
ISA
15B
RRP2
TR-1
CARE1
263
262
264
Measure Text
Number of children reached through outreach
activities (e.g., public meetings, conferences,
exhibits, community outreach, training, award
programs, mass mailings, phone calls, etc.)
conducted to address asbestos.
Number of outreach products produced [e.g., web
products, written publications (fact sheets, booklets,
reports), exhibits, training packages, mass mailings
(electronic or U.S. Postal mail)] addressing asbestos.
Number of training providers for lead-based paint
renovation, repair and painting accredited by the
Regional Office.
Number of tribal partnerships or projects addressing
lead-based paint hazards and exposure reduction.
Number of Community Action for Renewed
Environment (CARE) cooperative agreement proj ects
managed in order to obtain toxic reductions at the
local level.
Business, institutional and government costs reduced
through pollution prevention.
Gallons of water reduced through pollution
prevention.
Pounds of hazardous material reduced through
pollution prevention.
Non-
Corn mitment
Indicator (Y/N)
N
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
State Grant
Performance
Measure (Y/N)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Planning Target
National Target
(FY2012 Pres.
Bud)
$847 Million
27.8 Billion
1,064 Million
A TTACHMENTA: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
Page 3
-------
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
ATTACHMENT A: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
G/O/S
4.2
Measures
Central
Code
297
Measure Text
Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e)
reduced, conserved or offset through pollution
prevention.
Non-
Corn mitment
Indicator (Y/N)
N
State Grant
Performance
Measure (Y/N)
N
Planning Target
National Target
(FY2012 Pres.
Bud)
6.3 Million
MTCO2e
A TTACHMENTA: OCSPP FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES
Page 4
-------
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
FINAL FY 2012 NPM GUIDANCE
ATTACHMENT B: EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2011 AND FY 2012 GUIDANCE
Change from FY 2011 Guidance Document
Reason for Change
Affected Pages and
Sections
Priorities
FY 2011 Guidance contained four national
pesticide priorities and one area (Tribal
Pesticide Programs) which contained ACS
measures. For FY 2012, Guidance has
been modified to contain two cross-
Regional cutting priorities all Regions
must support and additional priorities
from which Regions must choose two to
support.
To provide additional flexibility to the
Regions to select activities that best meet
Regional objectives, but still contribute
to Agency (and pesticide program
goals). This approach was developed
through conversations with the Regions.
The section affected (page
21) is entitled "Pesticide
Regional-Specific Priority
Areas to Strengthen State
and Tribal Partnerships and
Programs".
Strategies
Added flexibility by allowing Regions to
choose activities with most potential to
reduce pesticide risks in their Regions.
To provide additional flexibility, as
discussed above.
See above.
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Added ACS Measure "IPM1" an ACS
non-commitment measure to exposure of
children to pests and pesticides through
increased adoption of verifiable and
sustainable IPM programs in schools at
the elementary through high school
levels.
To increase activities that encourages
school officials to adopt IPM practices.
Section starts on page 17.
Added ACS Measure "CORE" an ACS
measure to measure effective grants
management consistent with the FIFRA
Grant Guidance.
Tracks a new priority area for FY 12 of
Effective Grants Management.
Section starts on page 18.
ATTACHMENT B: OCSPP 'S EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2011 AND FY'2012 GUIDANCE
Page 1
-------
Deleted ACS Measure "CR2" (# of states
Region has assessed to determine capacity
to implement container/containment rule).
Deleted ACS Measure "WQ1" (Number
of evaluated pesticides of concern placed
under state or tribal program
management).
Replaced measures relating to Region-
specific projects to support worker safety,
certification and training, and container/
containment rule implementation (ACS
Measures "WPCT" and "CR1") with
general measure related to Region-specific
projects (new ACS Measure "RSP2").
Modified ACS Measure RRP2 to read :
Number of training providers for lead-
based paint renovation, repair and painting
accredited by the Region
Modified ACS P2 Program Measures to
reflect changes made to related GPRA
measures in the FY 2012 President's
Budget
Modified ACS Measures to implement
grammatical corrections.
Deleted ACS Measure "261"- BTUs of
energy reduced, conserved or offset by P2
program participants. (Billions of BTUs)
Program has progressed beyond this
point.
Replaced with a measure to track
regional projects supporting pesticides
and protection of water resources if this
priority area is selected by the region.
To achieve flexibility desired by new
structure.
This measure was modified for clarity.
ACS measures were modified for
consistency with "parent" GPRA
measures.
ACS measures were modified to make
grammatical corrections.
The measure was causing confusion in
the Regions and is duplicative as the
Agency is moving towards measuring
greenhouse gases.
Section starts on page 22.
Modifies Regional Measure
section on page 36,
definition language on page
38, and Attachment A, page
3.
Modifies Regional Measures
262, 263, 264 and 297 on
pages 45-46, and
Attachment A, pages 3-4.
Modifies Regional Measures
13A, 14, 15BandTR-l on
pages 38-39 and Attachment
A, page 2.
ATTACHMENTB: OCSPP 'S EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2011 AND FY'2012 GUIDANCE
Page 2
-------
Tracking
Process
Contacts
Program point of contacts has been
updated.
Page 10
ATTACHMENTB: OCSPP 'S EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2011 AND FY'2012 GUIDANCE
Page 3
------- |