FY20I2
EPA Budget in Brief
United States Environmental Protection Agency
www.epa.gov
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of the Chief Financial Officer (271OA)
Publication Number: EPA-190-S-11-001
February 2011
www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable—Printed on 100% postconsumer recycled paper.
-------
Budget in Brief
Table of Contents
PAGE
Overview 1
Summary Resource Charts
EPA's FY 2012 Budget by Goal 9
EPA's FY2012 by Appropriation 10
EPA's Resource History 11
EPA's Resources by Major Category 12
Highlights of Major Budget Changes 13
Goals
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 19
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 29
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development ...41
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 55
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 63
Appendices
Summary Resource Tables
EPA's Resources by Appropriation 75
EPA's Program/Projects by Program Area 77
Highlighted Programs
EPA Research and Development 91
Categorical Grants 95
STAG (State and Tribal Assistance Grants) 97
Estimated SRF Obligations by State (FY 2010-FY 2012) 105
Infrastructure Financing 109
Trust Funds (Superfund, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks) 115
List of Acronyms 119
-------
-------
Overview
Mission
The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is to protect human health and the environment.
Budget in Brief Overview
This Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Budget request reflects the tough choices needed for our
nation's short- and long-term fiscal health. The President directed EPA and other
federal agencies to reduce funding levels out of an understanding that the same
sacrifices are being made by American families every day. While this budget includes
significant cuts, it is designed to ensure that EPA can effectively carry out its core
mission to protect public health and our environment, including reductions of air and
water pollution, ensuring the safety of chemicals, providing for the strong enforcement
of environmental standards, as well as the cleanup of contaminated sites that
Americans expect. It also reflects EPA's overarching commitment to science and our
focus on the concerns of underserved communities and at-risk populations.
As it does every year, EPA has worked to find efficiencies within our programs while
protecting the most vulnerable in our communities, maintaining hard-won momentum in
improving compliance, revitalizing key ecosystems and following the science that will
help the Agency sustain progress and foster innovation. FY 2010's Budget of $10.3
billion was EPA's highest funding level since its creation; the FY 2012 Budget request
stands at $8.973 billion. For FY 2012, funding is maintained for EPA's core priorities,
such as enforcement of the environment and public health protections.
While this budget includes significant cuts, such as a combined $947 million reduction
to EPA's Clean Water and Drinking Water Revolving Funds (SRFs), as with any smart
budget, EPA plans to make targeted investments to ensure its effectiveness and
efficiency in protecting our health and environment. The FY 2012 Budget maintains
funding to update the Clean Air Act's standards and our efforts to assist in transitioning
America to a clean energy economy. It continues the critical work necessary for
protecting and restoring America's waters. This budget seeks to sustain progress in
assuring the safety of chemicals in our products, our environment and our bodies
through strategic investments and new approaches. It reflects a commitment to close
loopholes for big polluters, better ensuring that our federal laws are enforced effectively
and leverages new technologies to improve data processes, reducing the burden on
states, tribes, affected industry and the Agency. It also focuses on community-level
engagement to reach a broader range of citizens. Finally, it continues to reflect our core
-------
Overview
values of science and transparency in addressing America's complex environmental
protection challenges.
Although these difficult choices may unfortunately slow the pace of progress toward
performance measures established in our FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, the FY 2012
budget maintains the fundamental mission of the Agency: to protect the health of the
American people and our environment.
Below are the FY 2012 funding points of focus:
Improving Air Quality and Supporting Action on Greenhouse Gas Pollution
EPA will continue to protect American families' health by enforcing the Clean Air Act's
updated air pollution standards that rein in big polluters by cutting back on mercury,
carbon dioxide, arsenic and other life-threatening pollution in the air we breathe. EPA
will take measured, common-sense steps to address greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution
and improve air quality. Taking these reasonable steps to update standards now will
allow the Agency to better protect people's health, drive technology innovation for a
stronger economy, and protect the environment cost-effectively. In fact, creating more
sustainable materials and products is an opportunity for American innovators, investors,
and entrepreneurs.
EPA is requesting $5.1 million in additional resources for Air Toxics and $6.2 million in
upgrades to the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL). Additional
resources for air toxics will be used to improve EPA's air toxic monitoring capabilities
and to improve dissemination of information between and among the various EPA
offices, the state, local and tribal governments, and the public. Additional resources for
the NVFEL will begin to address the anticipated more than four-fold increase in the
number of vehicle and engine certificates EPA issues and the much more challenging
oversight requirements for both the vehicle/engine compliance program and fuels
programs due to the diversity of sophisticated technologies.
EPA's FY 2012 budget requests $46 million for efforts aimed to reduce GHG pollution
and address the Climate and Clean Energy Challenge. This includes the $25 million
described below for state grants focused on developing the technical capacity for
addressing GHG pollution in their Clean Air Act permitting activities and an additional $5
million for related EPA efforts. $6 million in additional funding is included for the
implementation of new emission standards that will reduce GHG pollution from
passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium duty passenger vehicles. These funds
also will support EPA's assessment and potential development, in response to legal
obligations, of standards for other mobile sources. Also included is $7 million for the
-------
Overview
assessment and potential development of New Source Performance Standards for
several categories of major stationary sources through means that are flexible and
manageable for business. Finally, this amount includes $2.5 million for priority
measurement, reporting and verification activities related to implementing the
Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, to ensure the collection of high quality data.
Protecting America's Water
Many of America's waterbodies are imperiled from a variety of stressors, and EPA will
work to confront the challenges from multiple angles - local and national, traditional and
innovative. In FY 2012, EPA will concentrate on a few targeted waterbodies. As part of
the Administration's long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water
Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with States and communities to enhance
technical, managerial and financial capacity. Important to the technical capacity will be
enhancing alternatives analysis to expand "green infrastructure" options and their
multiple benefits. Future year budgets for the SRFs gradually adjust, taking into
account repayments, through 2016 with the goal of providing, on average, about 5
percent of water infrastructure spending annually. When coupled with increasing
repayments from loans made in past years by states, the annual funding will allow the
SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water and drinking water
infrastructure. Federal dollars provided through the SRFs will act as a catalyst for
efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable water
infrastructure. Overall, the Administration requests a combined $2.5 billion for the SRFs.
This request brings the four year total for SRFs to nearly $17 billion (FY 2009 - FY
2012).
EPA is increasing resources to address upstream pollution resources in the Mississippi
River Basin. The Mississippi River Basin Program is funded at $6.0 million and will
focus on nonpoint source program enhancements to spur water-quality improvement.
This is supported by $600,000 for enforcement activities in the Basin. Resources for
the Chesapeake Bay Program are increased by $17.4 million to $67.4 million to support
our work under the President's Executive Order on the Chesapeake Bay, for
implementing a strategy to restore Bay water quality. While funding has gone down
from 2010 levels, EPA will also continue to lead the implementation of the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative, providing $350 million for programs and projects strategically
chosen to target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes
ecosystem. Continuing efforts in these and other clean water and drinking water
projects reflects a commitment to leverage Federal agency partnerships to strengthen
disadvantaged communities by reconnecting them with their waters and achieving
community-based goals.
-------
Overview
Building Strong State and Tribal Partnerships
The mission of EPA is achieved through strong collaboration with states and tribes and
reflects the Agency's overarching commitment to address the legitimate concerns of
underserved communities and at-risk populations. This budget includes $1.2 billion for
State and Tribal categorical grants, an increase of $85 million, to support States and
Tribes to implement their environmental programs. Our partners are working diligently
to implement updated standards under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Water Act
(CWA) and need additional support during this time of constrained state budgets.
The $306 million in State grant funding for air programs is above historical levels and
necessary to meet the additional responsibilities associated with achieving air quality
standards that better protect people's health and the environment. Increases for air
grants include $25 million for development and deployment of technical capacity
needed to address GHG pollution in permitting under the CAA and $54 million to
support increased state workload for implementation of updated National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.
An additional $21 million is requested for Water Pollution Control (Sec 106) grants. This
increase addresses issues that continue to degrade water quality issues nationwide by
supporting states as they focus on the continued development of water quality
standards, identification of impaired waters, development of Total Maximum Daily Loads
for use in permit actions, and targeted enforcement to address the most serious
instances of noncompliance. An additional $4 million is requested for Public Water
Systems Supervision (PWSS) grants to support management of state and drinking
water system data. This will improve transparency and efficiency as it will replace the
outdated Safe Drinking Water Information System/State Version (SDWIS/State) and
improve reporting and dissemination of drinking water system compliance information.
$20 million is requested for the Tribal Multimedia Implementation grant program in order
to help tribes move beyond building the capacity to plan, develop, and establish
environmental protection programs under the GAP program to implementation. This is
intended to advance negotiated environmental plans and activities on a cooperative
basis between tribes and EPA, ensuring that tribal environmental priorities are
adequately addressed.
Strengthening Enforcement and Compliance
The FY 2012 President's Budget includes approximately $621 million for EPA's
enforcement and compliance assurance program. EPA enforcement programs face
complex challenges that demand both traditional and innovative strategies to improve
our effectiveness and efficiency in protecting the health of American families. Through
-------
Overview
the Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas initiative, EPA will begin
to harness the tools of modern technology to address some of these challenges and
make EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program more efficient and
effective. EPA will start using 21st century electronic reporting (e-reporting), monitoring
tools, and market-based approaches to ensure a level playing field for American
businesses.
Maximizing the use of advanced data and monitoring tools will allow EPA to focus its
limited inspection and enforcement resources in those areas where they are most
effective or most necessary. These include complex industrial operations that require
physical inspection, cases involving potentially significant harm to human health or the
environment, potential criminal violations or repeat violators. In FY 2012, EPA will begin
to review existing compliance reporting requirements to identify opportunities to use
objective self-monitoring, self or third party certification, public accountability, advanced
monitoring techniques, and electronic reporting requirements.
EPA has focused on identifying where the most significant vulnerabilities exist, in terms
of scale and potential risk and proposes to increase oversight/monitoring of regulated
high risk facilities in order to better implement prevention approaches. In FY 2012, as
part of the Regaining Ground initiative, EPA will invest an additional $5 million to
increase the number of inspections at high risk facilities like oil facilities regulated under
the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) and the Facility Response
Plan (FRP) regulations. Funding will also be used to develop and implement a third
party audit program for non-high risk SPCC facilities, in order to improve the efficiency
of targeting resources and inspectors at these facilities in the future.
Enhancing Chemical Safety
America's citizens deserve to know the products they use are safe. To sustain progress
in assuring the safety of chemicals in our products, our environment and our bodies,
EPA is improving how it assesses the safety of chemicals in the environment and the
marketplace. FY 2012 represents a crucial stage in EPA's approach for enhancing
chemical safety. The program has attained its 'zero tolerance' goal in preventing
introduction of unsafe new chemicals into commerce but many 'pre-TSCA' chemicals
already in commerce remain un-assessed.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue with the transformation of its approach for ensuring
chemical safety. EPA's approach will be centered on increasing the pace in assessing
chemicals, strengthening information management, taking immediate and lasting
actions to eliminate or reduce identified chemical risks, and developing proven safer
alternatives.
-------
Overview
This budget request includes a $16 million investment to more fully implement the
Administrator's Enhancing Chemical Safety initiative by taking action to reduce chemical
risks, increase the pace of chemical hazard assessments, and provide the public with
greater access to toxic chemical information. Funding will support implementation of
chemical risk reduction actions that consider the impact of chemicals on children's
health and on disadvantaged, low income, and indigenous populations. The additional
funding will help to close knowledge and risk management gaps for thousands of
chemicals already in commerce by updating regulatory controls and other actions that
decrease potential impacts to human health and the environment. EPA also will
continue promoting use of safer chemicals, chemical management practices and
technologies to enable the transition away from existing chemicals that present
unreasonable human health and environmental risks.
Supporting Healthy Communities
The Environmental Protection Agency, along with other federal agencies, is committed
to protect, sustain or restore the health of communities and ecosystems by bringing
together a variety of programs, tools, approaches and resources directed to the local
level. A diversity of perspectives and experiences brings a wider range of ideas and
approaches and creates opportunities for innovation. Results are drawn from both
regulatory mechanisms and collaborative partnerships with stakeholders. Partnerships
with international, Federal, state, tribal, and local governments and non-governmental
organizations have long been a common thread across EPA's programs.
The FY 2012 budget includes a $19.8 million multidisciplinary initiative for Healthy
Communities. It supports states and communities in promoting healthier school
environments by increasing technical support, outreach and co-leading Federal
interagency coordination and integration efforts. It also provides resources to address
air toxics within at-risk communities and to support the important joint DOT/HUD/EPA
outreach and technical assistance efforts to encourage and facilitate sustainable
development within communities.
EPA supports the America's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative to develop a community-
based 21st century conservation agenda that can also spur job creation in the tourism
and recreation industries. EPA will join the Department of the Interior, the Department
of Agriculture, and the Council on Environmental Quality to lead the coordinated effort to
leverage support across the Federal Government to help community-driven efforts to
protect and restore our outdoor legacy. The area-wide planning and community support
focus of existing EPA programs and initiatives like Urban Waters and Brownfields
programs align well with the goals and objectives of this new initiative.
-------
Overview
Maintaining a Strong Science Foundation
In FY 2012, EPA is restructuring our scientific research program to be more integrated
and cross-disciplinary, allowing our scientific work to be more transformational. EPA is
strengthening its planning and delivery of science to more deeply examine our
environmental and public health challenges and inform sustainable solutions to meet
our strategic goals. By looking at problems from a systems perspective, this new
research approach will create synergy and produce more timely and comprehensive
results beyond those possible from approaches that are more narrowly targeted to
single chemicals or problem areas. In FY 2012, we are requesting a science and
technology budget of $826 million. This amount includes increases to research on
endocrine disrupting chemicals, green chemistry, e-waste and e-design, green
infrastructure, computational toxicology, air monitoring, drinking water and Science,
Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM) Fellowships.
Science is - and must continue to be - the foundation of all our work at EPA. Good
science leads to shared solutions; everyone benefits from clean air and clean water.
Rigorous science leads to innovative solutions to complex environmental challenges.
Most of the scientific research increases will support additional Science to Achieve
Results (STAR) grants and fellowships to make progress on these research priorities
and leverage the expertise of the academic research community. This budget also
supports the study of computational toxicology and other priority research efforts with a
focus on advancing the design of sustainable solutions for reducing risks associated
with environmentally hazardous substances. Two million dollars is also included to
conduct a long-term review of EPA's laboratory network.
-------
-------
Overview
Environmental Protection Agency's
FY 2012 Budget by Goal
Total Agency: $8,973 Million
Goal 5
9.2%
Goall
12.5%
Goal 4
7.8%
Goal 3
22.4%
Goal 2
48.1%
E3 Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
n Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
D Goal 3: Cleaning Up Our Communities
D Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
EH Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Note: Dollar totals and percentages in chart exclude a $50 million cancellation of prior
year funds. Totals may not add due to rounding.
-------
Overview
STAG
42.8%
LUST
$112 M
1.2%
Environmental Protection Agency's
FY 2012 Budget by Appropriation
Total Agency: $8,973 Million
EPM
31.9%
SF
13.7%
$42 M
0.5%
E3 Science & Technology
R Inspector General
ffl Inland Oil Spill
D Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
D Environmental Programs & Management
D Buildings & Facilities
IE Superfund
H State & Tribal Assistance Grants
Note: Dollar totals and percentages in chart exclude a $50 million cancellation of prior
year funds. Totals may not add due to rounding.
10
-------
Overview
EPA's Enacted Budget FY2000 to 2012
$12.0
$10.0
C $8.0
(Dollars in Billions)
m
$6.0
$4.0
$2.0
$0.0
OPresident's Budget OAnnualized CR • Enacted Budgets
$10.3 $10.3
$7.8
$8.1 $8.1 . $8'4 . $80
Q£
O
•D
V
N
15
c
c
T—
T—
O
CM
>-
LL
$9.0
O)
•D
m
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Fiscal Year
Notes: FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding
supplemental appropriations.
FY2002 Enacted includes $175.6 M provided for Homeland Security in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act.
FY 2006 Enacted excludes hurricane supplemental funding.
All Enacted Budgets and Annualized CR include rescissions; President's Budget includes cancellation of prior year funds.
EPA's FTE* Ceiling History
18,500
HI
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Fiscal Year
* FTE (Full Time Equivalent) = one employee working full time for a full year (52 weeks X 40 hours = 2,080 hours), or the equivalent number of
hours worked by several part-time or temporary employees.
Notes: FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental
appropriations.
FY2012 President's Budget FTE level reflects a realignment of total FTEsto better reflect utilization rates and excludes projected 69
reimbursable FTE for Pesticides Registration Fund which do not count against FTE ceiling.
11
-------
Overview
$12.0
$10.0
$4.0
$2.0
$0.0
Environmental Protection Agency's
Resources by Major Category
(Dollars in Billions)
m Categorical Grants
M Operating Budget
• Trust Funds
D Infrastructure Financing
$7.6 $7.7 $7.5 $7.6
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN CR PB
Notes:
Totals may not add due to rounding
The Operating Budget includes funding provided for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.
FY 2005 Enacted reflects 0.8% Rescission
FY 2006 Enacted reflects 0.476% rescission plus 1% additional rescission and $80 M rescission to prior year funds.
Excludes Hurricane Supplemental funding.
FY 2008 Enacted includes a 1.56% rescission and $5 M rescission to prior year funds
FY 2009 Enacted reflects a $10 M rescission to prior year funds
FY 2010 Enacted reflects a $40 M rescission to prior year funds
FY 2011 CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental
appropriations. This total reflects a $40 M rescission to prior year funds
FY 2012 President's Budget reflects a $50 M cancellation of prior year funds
12
-------
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
Climate Change and Air Quality
CAA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permitting
(FY 2012 PB: $30.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $OM, FY 2012 Change: +$30.0M)
Supports states in developing and deploying the technical capacity needed to address greenhouse
gas emissions in permitting large sources as part of their Clean Air Act programs.
GHG New Source Performance Standards
(FY 2012 PB: $7.6M, FY 2010 Enacted: $O.OM, FY 2012 Change: +$7.6M)
In response to legal obligations regarding NSPS, funding will support the assessment, and potential
development, of greenhouse gas limits for several categories of major stationary sources of
greenhouse gases through means that are flexible and manageable for businesses.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Rule
(FY 2012 PB: $19.2M, FY 2010 Enacted: $16.7M, FY 2012 Change: +$2.5M)
Increase to support implementation of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule.
GHG Standards for Transportation Sources
(FY 2012 PB: $6.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $O.OM, FY 2012 Change: +$6.0M)
$2.0 million increase to support the implementation of GHG standards for passenger cars, light-duty
trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles.
$4.0 million increase to support the analysis and potential development and subsequent
implementation of GHG standards for heavy-duty trucks and for initial analysis in support of other
mobile-source categories such as locomotives, marine, and aircraft engines, in order to respond to
rulemaking petitions.
Carbon Capture and Sequestration
(FY 2012 PB: $10.1M, FY 2010 Enacted: $7.9M, FY 2012 Change: +$2.2M)
Increase to address several critical air and climate-related issues and assist State in implementing
new federal requirements for underground injection of carbon dioxide.
Air Toxics Initiative
(FY2012 PB: $26.6M, FY2010 Enacted: $21.5M, FY2012 Change: +$5.1 M)
Requested increase of $3.7 million will be targeted at improvements in monitoring capabilities on
source-specific and ambient bases. These funds will also improve the dissemination of information
between and among the various EPA offices, the state, local and tribal governments, and the public.
An additional $1.4 million will support the development of regulations that are needed to meet court-
ordered deadlines, including MACT standards that have been found deficient by the courts.
Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) Grants
(FY 2012 PB: $O.OM, FY 2010 Enacted: $60.0M, FY 2012 Change: -$60.0M)
This reduction reflects the elimination of DERA grant funding for FY 2012.
Grants focus on emission reductions from existing diesel engines through engine retrofits, rebuilds
and replacements; switching to cleaner fuels; idling reduction strategies; and other clean diesel
strategies.
13
-------
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
America's Waters
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)
(FY 2012 PB: $350.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $475.0M, FY 2012 Change: -$125.0M)
Programs and projects will be strategically chosen to target the most significant environmental
problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem, a $125 million decrease from FY 2010, the first year of the
initiative.
The initiative will implement the most important projects for Great Lakes Restoration and achieve
visible results. FY 2012 activities will emphasize implementation and include grants to implement the
Initiative by funding states, tribes and other partners.
Chesapeake Bay Program
(FY 2012 PB: $67.4M FY 2010 Enacted: $50.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$17.4M)
Increase for implementation of the President's Executive Order on Chesapeake Bay Protection and
Restoration.
Funding will support Bay watershed States as they implement their plans to reduce nutrient and
sediment pollution in an unprecedented effort to restore this economically important ecosystem.
Mississippi River Basin
(FY 2010 PB: $6.6M, FY 2010 Enacted: $O.OM, FY 2012 Change: +$6.6M)
Through a competitive grant process with States, the Mississippi River Basin program will address
excessive nutrient loadings that contribute to water quality impairments in the basin and, ultimately, to
hypoxic conditions (dead zones) in the Gulf of Mexico.
Working with the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force, EPA will help target efforts within critical watersheds to
implement effective strategies that can yield significant progress in addressing nonpoint source
nutrient pollution.
A key emphasis will be coordinating with USDA and USGS to promote sustainable agricultural
practices, to reduce nutrient loadings in the Mississippi River Basin and to implement monitoring
programs to measure nutrient reductions.
Included within this total is $0.6M for enforcement actions in the Basin.
Water Infrastructure
State Revolving Funds (SRFs)
(FY 2012 PB: $2,540.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $3,487.0M, FY 2012 Change: -$947.0M)
The FY 2012 Budget request of $2,540 million reflects $1,550 million for the Clean Water SRF and
$990 million for the Drinking Water SRF.
As part of the Administration's long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water
Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with states and communities to enhance technical,
managerial and financial capacity.
Future year budgets for SRF Budget gradually adjust, taking into account repayments, through 2016
with the goal of providing, on average, about 5 percent of water infrastructure spending annually.
When coupled with increasing repayments from loans made in past years by states, the annual
funding will allow the SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water and drinking water
infrastructure, respectively.
14
-------
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
State and Tribal Partnerships
State and Local Air Quality Management Grants
(FY 2012 PB: $305.5M, FY 2010 Enacted: $226.6M, FY 2012 Change: +$78.9M)
Increase of $37.4 million to support expanded core state workload for implementing additional
NAAQS and reducing public exposure to air toxics. This will support state workload when
implementing updated NAAQS resulting from EPA's commitment to review each NAAQS according to
the CAA deadlines.
$15.0 million specifically for additional state air monitors required by new or revised NAAQS. States
previously could use grant funding to procure monitors, but this is the first time funding will be
specifically for monitors.
Includes $25.0 million state grant increase to support state efforts to develop and deploy the technical
capacity needed to address greenhouse gas emissions in permitting large sources under the Clean
Air Act.
$1.5 million will support the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to be used by states to facilitate the
collection, review and use of greenhouse gas emissions data.
Water Pollution Control Grants (Sect. 106)
(FY 2012 PB: $250.3M, FY 2010 Enacted: $229.3M, FY 2012 Change: +$21 .OM)
Increase to strengthen the base state, interstate and Tribal programs.
Increase reflects recognition of the growing workload for State Water programs to address post-
construction runoff and other new or anticipated regulatory requirements and address emerging water
quality issues such as nutrient pollution.
Multi-Media Tribal Implementation Grants
(FY 2012 PB: $20.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $O.OM, FY 2012 Change: +$20.0M)
Funds a new grant program that will allow the Agency to provide multi-media grants to tribes to
augment capacity building efforts and begin implementing Federal environmental protection
programs.
Tribes will be able to develop and implement programs consistent with EPA statutory authorities such
as CAA 105, CWA 106, RCRA and other tribal priorities. This may include tribal activities such as
monitoring, permitting, and other implementation responsibilities.
Tribal General Assistance Grants
(FY2012 PB: $71.4M, FY2010 Enacted: $62.9M, FY2012 Change: +$8.5M)
Increase will provide tribes with a stronger foundation to build tribal environmental protection capacity.
Furthers EPA's partnership and collaboration with tribes to address a wider set of program
responsibilities and challenges. EPA also will fund targeted assistance initiatives focused on long-
standing and mutually agreed-upon concerns in Indian country.
Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) Grants
(FY2012 PB: $164.8M, FY2010 Enacted: $200.9M, FY2012 Change: -$36.1 M)
Decreases funding for nonpoint source programs, including implementation of nonpoint source
projects and statewide nonpoint source protection activities.
Reforms to program in FY 2012 will increase program's effectiveness and help maximize its impact.
15
-------
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
Enforcement and Compliance
Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas
(FY 2012 PB: $68.3M, FY 2010 Enacted: $40.8M, FY 2012 Change: +$27.5M)
Increase to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the compliance monitoring program with an
emphasis on electronic reporting (e-reporting), enhanced data systems to collect, synthesize and
disseminate monitoring data, and deployment of state of the art monitoring equipment to the field.
EPA will increase the number of inspections at high risk chemical and oil facilities regulated under the
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC), the Facility Response Plan (FRP), and the
Risk Management Plan (RMP) regulations.
This proposal will begin to usher in a new enforcement paradigm, helping EPA and its state partners
effectively protect communities, keep up to pace with our responsibilities and assure a level playing
field for corporate America.
Deepwater Horizon Litigation
(FY2012 PB: $4.1 M, FY2010 Enacted: $1.1 M, FY 2012 Change: +$3.0M)
EPA's response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue in FY 2012 as the Agency provides
support for the U.S. Department of Justice's civil action and criminal investigations against those
responsible for the Deepwater Horizon incident.
Chemical Safety
Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
(FY 2012 PB: $71 .OM, FY 2010 Enacted $54.9M, FY 2012 Change: +$16.1 M)
This investment will more fully implement the Administrator's Enhancing Chemical Safety Initiative.
Assuring the Safety of Chemicals is one of the Administrator's highest priorities. The Agency will work
to sustain significant and long overdue progress in assuring the safety of chemicals in our products,
our environment and our bodies.
Additional funding will help EPA take action to strengthen information management and transparency,
increase the pace of chemical hazard assessments, and reduce identified chemical risks.
Healthy Communities
Clean, Green, and Healthy Schools
(FY 2012 PB: $4.8M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.1 M, FY 2012 Change: +$4.7M)
As part of the Healthy Communities Initiative: Clean, Green and Healthy Schools, the program will
continue working internally and with other agencies, states and tribes to expand coordinated
implementation of successful community-based programs to improve children's health outcomes,
including increased technical assistance on school siting, environmental health guidelines, and
Integrated Pest Management in schools.
Air Toxics in Communities
(FY 2012 PB: $6.4M, FY 2010 Enacted: $O.OM, FY 2012 Change: +$6.4)
Increase to conduct integrated pilots in several communities, particularly those including
disadvantaged groups, to systematically evaluate and reduce risks from air toxics through regulatory,
enforcement, and voluntary efforts.
Resources will support expanded analyses and information access by enhancing tools such as the
National Air Pollution Assessment (NAPA), National Air Toxic Assessment (NATA), BenMAP, and Air
Facility System (AFS).
16
-------
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
Sustainable Communities
(FY 2012 PB: $9.9M, FY 2010 Enacted: $5.7M, FY 2012 Change: +$4.2M)
Increase allows EPA to more fully implement the Partnership for Sustainable Communities with U.S.
Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban and Development.
Increases technical assistance provided to Tribal, state, Regional, and local governments in
integrating smart growth.
Urban Waters
(FY2012 PB: $5.1 M, FY2010 Enacted: $O.OM, FY 2012 Change: +$5.1 M)
Funds for grants and targeted technical assistance to communities, especially disadvantaged
communities to restore urban waters.
Will help address water quality challenges in urban watersheds and build the capacity of
disadvantaged communities to protect and restore their environment through projects that revitalize
these watersheds.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
(FY2012 PB: $116.9M, FY2010 Enacted: $123.3M, FY2012 Change: -$6.4M)
Includes a request of $2 million in new funding to support development of an electronic hazardous
waste manifest system which will result in reduced reporting burdens for regulated entities.
As a result of this net reduction EPA will not offer tribal grants for integrated solid waste management
planning and will reduce extramural support for regulation development.
Reduction will result in EPA discontinuing support for several voluntary programs including Carpet
America and the National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) program in order to
enhance program focus on emerging priorities.
Pollution Prevention
(FY2012 PB: $15.7M, FY2010 Enacted: $18.1M, FY2012 Change: -$2.4M)
Resulting reduction will eliminate support to "green" the Agency's facilities and procurement actions,
and reduce the Green Chemistry program's communications and outreach efforts.
Also, results in the termination of ongoing Design for the Environment partnerships, including those
with the photovoltaic and automotive refinishing industries.
Research
Research Program
(FY2012 PB: $584.1 M, FY2010 Enacted: $596.7M, FY2012 Change: -$12.6M)
Highlights of the request include a $24.7 million increase to support Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) grants to conduct research in key areas in support of the Administrator's priorities.
Requested STAR grant increases include resources for Hydraulic Fracturing ($4.2 million), Endocrine
Disrupters ($7 million), Green Infrastructure ($6 million), and STAR fellowships ($6 million) in support
of the Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) government wide initiative.
Also requests an additional $2 million for Computational Toxicology to speed development of next
generation tools and facilitate implementation of the Agency's Endocrine Disrupter Screening
program.
Finally, a $2 million increase is requested to support the plan for a long-term review of EPA's
laboratory network.
These increases are offset by reductions to Sustainable and Healthy Communities research ($17.5
million), Homeland Security Research ($8.2 million), Air, Climate, and Energy Research ($3.4), and
other targeted reductions.
17
-------
Highlights of Major Budget Changes
Superfund
Superfund Program
(FY 2012 PB: $1,236.2M, FY 2010 Enacted: $1,306.5M, FY 2012 Change: -$70.3M)
Request includes $810.8 million for the Superfund Cleanup programs to address emergencies
(Superfund Emergency Response and Removal) and the Nation's most contaminated hazardous
waste sites (Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities).
$30.9 million and 13.2 FTE reduction in the Remedial program explores program efficiencies and
recognizes fiscal constraints, will postpone new remedial construction starts and may slow down
steps that lead up to being ready for construction, including site assessment and characterization
projects and site analytical services support.
$7.4 million and 10.8 FTE reduction in the Removal program will be primarily applied to reductions in
Superfund-lead removal actions while EPA continues to focus on encouraging PRPs to conduct
removal actions and undertakes an effort to identify efficiencies in program operations and
management.
$5.9 million and 16.0 FTE reduction in the Federal Facilities program will reduce EPA's work at non-
NPL sites to minimize impacts in meeting our statutory requirements at federal NPL sites. Combined
with the reduction to Superfund Remedial, the Agency's ability to achieve goals such as the annual
number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed may also be affected going forward.
$2.8 million and 30.0 FTE reduction will decrease EPA enforcement staff available to identify, locate
and reach settlement with PRPs to clean up sites or recover trust fund dollars expended.
Other Significant FY2012 Changes
The Agency also proposed a number of changes to increase program effectiveness as well as to reflect
programmatic and administrative efficiencies. The reductions, savings, and policy recommendations
reflect our commitment to being thoughtful stewards of public funds.
Administrative Efficiency Initiative
Total $40.0 million reduction across multiple program projects is part of the government-wide
initiative. This initiative targets certain categories of spending for efficiencies and reductions,
including advisory contracts, general services, printing and supplies. EPA will continue its work to
redesign processes and streamline activities in both administrative and programmatic areas to
achieve these savings.
Superfund Tax Reinstatement
The Administration supports reinstating the Superfund taxes to ensure that parties who benefit from
the manufacture or sale of substances commonly found in hazardous waste sites contribute to the
cost of cleanup.
Since the expiration of Superfund tax, Superfund program funding has been largely financed from
General Revenue transfers to the Superfund Trust Fund, thus burdening the general public with the
costs of cleaning up hazardous waste sites.
Reinstating the Superfund taxes would provide a stable, dedicated source of revenue to be placed in
the Superfund Trust Fund where the revenues would be available for appropriation by Congress to
support the cleanup of the Nation's most contaminated sites.
LUST Trust Fund Financing Tax
The LUST Trust Fund financing tax on fuel was most recently reauthorized in the Energy Policy Act of
2005 and expires on September 30, 2011.
The Administration supports reauthorizing the LUST Trust Fund financing tax which funds clean-ups
in cases where tank owners and operators are unable to pay for cleanups at sites for which they have
responsibility, or where a responsible party cannot be identified.
18
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air
Quality
Strategic Goal: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation
strategies to address climate change, and protect and improve air quality.
Resource Summary
($ in 000)
12.5% of Budget
1 - Address Climate Change
2 - Improve Air Quality
3 - Restore the Ozone Layer
4 - Reduce Unnecessary
Exposure to Radiation
Goal 1 Total
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$196,886
$872,147
$18,663
$42,732
$1,130,428
FY 201 1
Annualized
CR
$196,886
$872,147
$18,663
$42,732
$1,130,428
Difference
FY2012 FY 2010 EN
President's to FY 201 2
Budget PresBud
$252,854
$820,451
$18,160
$39,454
$1,130,919
$55,968
($51,696)
($503)
($3,278)
$491
Workyears
2,735
2,735
2,809
74
NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding.
FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
Introduction
EPA has dedicated itself to protecting and improving the quality of the Nation's air to
promote public health and protect the environment. Air pollution concerns are diverse
and significant, and include: greenhouse gases (GHGs) and climate change, outdoor
and indoor air quality, radon, stratospheric ozone depletion, and radiation protection.
Since passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments in 1990, nationwide air quality has
improved significantly. Despite this progress, about 127 million Americans (about 40%
of the US population) lived in counties with air that did not meet health-based standards
for at least one pollutant in 2009. Long-term exposure to elevated levels of certain air
pollutants has been associated with increased risk of cancer, premature mortality, and
damage to the immune, neurological, reproductive, cardiovascular, and respiratory
systems. Short-term exposure to elevated levels of certain air pollutants can
exacerbate asthma and lead to other adverse health effects; additional impacts
associated with increased air pollution levels include missed work and school days.
19
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Because people spend much of their lives indoors, the quality of indoor air also is a
major concern. Twenty percent of the population spends the day indoors in elementary
and secondary schools, where problems with leaky roofs and with heating, ventilation,
and air conditioning systems can lead to increased presence of molds and other
environmental allergens which can trigger a host of health problems, including asthma
and allergies. Exposure to indoor radon is related to an estimated 20,000 lung cancer
deaths each year.
The issues of highest importance facing the air program over the next few years will be
ozone and particulate air pollution, interstate transport of air pollutants, emissions from
transportation sources, toxic air pollutants, indoor air pollutants (including radon), and
GHGs. EPA uses a variety of approaches to reduce pollutants in indoor and outdoor
air. The Agency works with other federal agencies; state, Tribal, and local
governments; and international partners and stakeholders; and employs strategies that
include: traditional regulatory tools; innovative, market-based techniques; public- and
private-sector partnerships; community-based approaches; voluntary programs that
promote environmental stewardship; and programs that encourage cost-effective
technologies and practices.
EPA's air toxic control programs are critical to EPA's continued progress in reducing
public health risks and improving the quality of the environment. EPA has been unable
to meet many of the statutory deadlines for air toxics standards established in the Clean
Air Act due to numerous unfavorable court decisions, inherent management challenges,
complexity of risk modeling frameworks, and budget constraints over the past decade
as resources have shifted to managing criteria pollutants that pose higher overall health
risks. Lawsuits over missed deadlines have in many cases set the Agency's agenda,
rather than health and environmental outcomes. Working with litigants and informed by
analysis of air quality health risk data, EPA is working to prioritize key air toxics
regulations for completion in 2011 and 2012 that can be completed expeditiously and
that will address significant risks to the public health.
The supply and diversity of biofuels in America is growing every year, and a new
generation of automobile technologies, including several new plug-in hybrids and all-
electric vehicles, is literally "hitting the road" this year. Because EPA is responsible for
establishing the test procedures needed to estimate the fuel economy of new vehicles,
and for verifying car manufacturers' data on fuel economy, the Agency is investing in
additional testing and certification capacity to ensure that new vehicles, engines, and
fuels are in compliance with new vehicle and fuel standards. In particular, compared to
conventional vehicles, advanced technology vehicles like Plug-in Hybrid Electric
Vehicles (PHEV) and Battery Electric Vehicles (EV) require additional testing. Current
electric vehicle dynamometer testing can occupy test cells for several shifts, since the
current test procedures require the vehicles run through their entire battery charge.
Improved, shortened EV test procedures are under development by EPA. PHEV testing
may actually consume more time than EV testing, due primarily to the requirement that
PHEVs be tested in both electric/electric assist mode and in hybrid mode. Without
20
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
testing PHEVs in both modes, EPA cannot accurately determine PHEV fuel economy
and emissions compliance. The new standards for vehicle greenhouse gas emissions
in particular will require EPA to more frequently verify car manufacturers' data for a
greater variety of vehicle engine technologies. To prepare for this workload, the
Agency will continue its support of the multi-year National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions
Laboratory (NVFEL) modernization effort.
Major FY 2012 Investment Areas
Air Toxics
In FY 2012, EPA will invest $6.1 million in several activities that support the air toxics
program. $3.1 million will be targeted at improvements in monitoring capabilities on
source-specific and ambient bases. These funds will also improve the dissemination of
information between and amongst the various EPA offices, the state, local and tribal
governments, and the public. The remaining $2.9 million of this investment will be used
for enhancing tools such as the National Air Pollution Assessment (NAPA), National Air
Toxic Assessment (NATA), BenMAP, and Air Facility System (AFS), which will also
improve monitoring capabilities. EPA anticipates that this investment will substantially
increase the Agency's ability to meet aggressive court ordered schedules to complete
rulemaking activities, such as standards to address the refining sector where 25 rules
must be acted upon in the fiscal year. This investment will also assist the Agency in its
work to complete or develop an additional 150 rules in FY 2013 that are under legal or
statutory deadlines.
Support for State Air Quality Management
EPA is investing an additional $77 million in state assistance grants to support NAAQS
implementation and greenhouse gas permitting. Specific increases include $25 million
to assist in permitting greenhouse gas emissions sources. These funds will develop
and deploy to states the technical capacity needed to address greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions in permitting under the Clean Air Act. An additional $52 million will support
increased state workload for implementation of updated National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. This investment includes requested funding of $15 million for additional
state air monitors, as required by the revised NAAQS The request also includes an
additional $37.0 million to support state activities, including revising state
implementation plans (SIPs) and developing models and emissions inventories needed
for multi-state air quality management strategies.
Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions
In order to promote fiscal responsibility EPA is also making the tough choices, including:
• In the face of significant budget constraints, EPA has made the difficult budget
decision to not propose new DERA grant funding in FY 2012. During this time,
the program will continue to support already on-going projects funded through
21
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
DERA and stimulus funds, adding to the tremendous public health benefits
associated with the program that have resulted from significant reductions in air
pollution, particularly in our cities and around our ports and transportation hubs.
• Discontinuing the Climate Leaders program as large businesses find assistance
with their energy-saving and GHG reducing actions through private entities.
• Reducing funding for the Indoor Air program's partnership and outreach to
external stakeholders and for the Radiation and Indoor Environments
laboratories.
Priority Goals
EPA has established two Priority Goals to improve the country's ability to measure and
control Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. The Priority Goals are:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Mandatory Reporting Rule
• By June 15, 2011, EPA will make publically available 100 percent of facility-level
GHG emissions data submitted to EPA in accordance with the GHG Reporting
Rule, compliant with policies protecting Confidential Business Information (CBI).
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Light Duty Vehicles
• In 2011, EPA, working with DOT, will begin implementation of regulations
designed to reduce the GHG emissions from light duty vehicles sold in the US
starting with model year 2012.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to track progress towards its Priority Goals and will
update goals as necessary and appropriate.
FY 2012 Activities
Reducing GHG Emissions and Developing Adaptation Strategies to Address
Climate Change
Climate change poses risks to public health, the environment, cultural resources, the
economy, and quality of life. Many effects of climate change are already evident and
some will persist into the future regardless of future levels of GHG emissions. Climate
change impacts include higher temperatures and may lead to more stagnant air masses
which are expected to make it more challenging to achieve air quality standards for
smog in many regions of the country, adversely affecting public health if areas cannot
attain or maintain clean air. Another example is that a rise in sea level or increased
precipitation intensity may increase flooding, which could affect water quality if large
volumes of water transport contaminants and overload storm and wastewater systems.
In order to protect public health and the environment, EPA and air and water quality
managers at the state, tribal, and local levels must recognize and consider the
challenge a changing climate poses to their mission.
22
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Responding to the threat of climate change is one of the Agency's top priorities. EPA's
strategies to address climate change support the President's GHG emissions reduction
goals. We will work with partners and stakeholders to provide tools and information
related to GHG emissions and impacts, and will reduce GHG emissions domestically
and internationally through cost-effective, voluntary programs while pursuing additional
regulatory actions as needed.
In FY 2012, the Agency will begin some new areas of activity, expand some existing
strategies, and discontinue others.
These efforts include:
• Implementing new standards to reduce emissions from cars and light-duty trucks
for model years 2012 through 2016, extending that program to model year 2017
and beyond, and creating a similar program to reduce GHGs from medium- and
heavy-duty trucks for model years 2014-2018.
• Establishing permitting requirements for facilities including utilities and refineries
that emit large amounts of GHGs to encourage design and construction of more
efficient and advanced processes that will contribute to a clean energy economy.
• Promulgating New Source Performance Standards for greenhouse gases for the
electric utility generation and refinery sectors.
• Implementing voluntary programs that reduce GHGs through the greater use of
energy efficient technologies and products.
• Implementing a national system for reporting GHG emissions; implementing
permitting requirements for new and modified facilities that emit substantial
amounts of GHGs.
• Working with Congress on options for cost-effective legislation to promote a
clean energy future and address GHG emissions.
• Developing a comprehensive report to Congress on black carbon that will provide
a foundation for evaluating future approaches to black carbon mitigation.
• Identifying and assessing substitute chemical and ozone-depleting substances
and processes for their global warming potential.
• Educating the public about climate change and actions people can take to reduce
GHG emissions.
Improving Air Quality
Clean Air
Addressing outdoor air pollution and the interstate transport of air pollution are top
priorities for the Agency. Elevated levels of air pollution are linked to thousands of
asthma cases and heart attacks, and almost 2 million lost school or work days. EPA
recently strengthened the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for lead,
sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide, is in the process of reviewing the particulate matter
and carbon monoxide standards, and is reconsidering the 2008 ozone standard. Over
23
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
the next few years, EPA will work with states and Tribes to designate areas where the
air does not meet these standards, and develop and implement plans to meet the
NAAQS. In FY 2011, EPA plans to finalize the Transport Rule, which is expected to be
implemented in FY 2012. This rule will reduce power plant emissions that drift across
the borders of 31 eastern states and the District of Columbia. The new transport rule,
along with local and state air pollution controls, is designed to help areas in the eastern
United States meet existing health standards for ozone and particulate matter. As EPA
addresses these pollutants, the Agency also is working to improve the overall air quality
management system and address the air quality challenges expected over the next 10
to 20 years. This includes working with partners and stakeholders to develop
comprehensive air quality strategies that address multiple pollutants and consider the
interplay between air quality and factors such as land use, energy, and transportation.
Mobile sources (including light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles; on-road vehicles and off-
road engines; as well as ships, aircraft and trains) contribute a substantial percentage of
the nation's pollution burden. EPA addresses emissions from motor vehicles, engines,
and fuels through an integrated strategy that combines regulatory approaches that take
advantage of technological advances and cleaner and higher-quality fuels with voluntary
programs that reduce vehicle, engine, and equipment activity and emissions. Future
regulatory activity includes proposing Tier 3 vehicle and fuel standards in FY 2012 in
response to the May 2010 Presidential Directive and new on-board diagnostic
requirements for non-road diesel engines. In the fuels area, EPA is working with
refiners, renewable fuel producers, and others to implement regulations to increase the
amount of renewable fuel blended into gasoline.
Air Toxics
As part of the investment in air toxics, EPA will work with affected communities to
address risks and track progress, with additional emphasis on communities that may be
disproportionately impacted by toxic air emissions. The Agency will continue to work
with state and local air pollution control agencies and community groups to assess and
address air toxics emissions in areas of greatest concern, including where the most
vulnerable members of our population live, work, and go to school. EPA is implementing
a sector-based strategy to develop rules that will achieve the greatest reductions in risks
from air toxics, provide regulatory certainty for sources, and meet the statutory
requirements of the Clean Air Act. The sector-based strategy and the investment in FY
2012 will assist EPA in addressing 25 rules in the refining sector that are under legal
deadlines and various Risk Technology Reviews (RTR) that are under legal deadlines.
This strategy includes:
• Prioritize rules for large stationary sources of air toxics, providing the greatest
opportunity for cost-effective emissions reductions; including petroleum refining; iron
and steel; chemical manufacturing; utilities; non-utility boilers; oil and gas; and
Portland cement. Emissions from every one of these seven key categories occur in
areas where there is the potential to disproportionately affect minority communities.
24
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
• Reduce air toxic emissions from chemical plants and refineries. While many
chemical and refining emission points are well understood, some sources, such as
leaks from process piping, startups and shutdown, malfunctions, flaring, and
wastewater are more difficult to characterize, and may not be sufficiently controlled.
• Provide better information to communities through monitoring, including facility fence
line and remote monitoring, and national assessments.
• Involve other related organizations and stakeholders in planning and
implementation.
• Improve data collection both through efforts directed by OAR and through enhanced
data collection during enforcement activities.
Indoor Air
The Indoor Air Program characterizes the risks of indoor air pollutants to human health
including radon, environmental triggers of asthma, and tobacco smoke; develops
techniques for reducing those risks; and educates the public about indoor air quality
(IAQ) actions they can take to reduce their risks from IAQ problems. Often the people
most exposed to indoor air pollutants are those most susceptible to the effects—the
young, the elderly, and the chronically ill. In FY 2012, funding will be reduced for
partnership and outreach support with external stakeholders and the Radiation and
Indoor Environments National Laboratory (R&IE), and the Tools for Schools program
will be eliminated. Despite these reductions, EPA will continue to educate and
encourage individuals, local communities, school officials, industry, the health-care
community, Tribal programs, and others to take action to reduce health risks in indoor
environments such as homes, schools, and workplaces. Outreach includes national
public awareness and media campaigns, as well as community-based outreach and
education. EPA also uses technology-transfer to improve the design, operation, and
maintenance of buildings - including schools, homes, and workplaces - to promote
healthier indoor air. The focus of all these efforts is to support communities' and state
and local agencies' efforts to address indoor air quality health risks.
The Radon Program promotes action to reduce the public's risk to indoor radon (second
only to smoking as a cause of lung cancer). In FY 2012, EPA will reduce regional
support for Radon Program outreach, education, guidance, and technical assistance.
Despite these reductions, this non-regulatory program will continue to encourage and
facilitate national, regional, state, and Tribal programs and activities that support
initiatives targeted to radon testing and mitigation, as well as to radon resistant new
construction. Funding is maintained for the State Indoor Radon Grant Program, which
provides categorical grants to develop, implement, and enhance programs that assess
and mitigate radon risks. In FY 2011, EPA launched a new radon initiative with other
federal agencies to significantly increase attention to radon testing, mitigation and public
education opportunities within each agency's sphere of responsibility. Implementation
of these strategies will be pursued in FY 2012.
25
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
Stratospheric Ozone - Domestic and Montreal Protocol
EPA's stratospheric ozone protection program implements the provisions of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the Act) and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that
Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), continuing the control and reduction of
ozone depleting substances (ODS) in the U.S. and lowering health risks to the
American public. As ODS and many of their substitutes are also potent GHGs,
appropriate control and reduction of these substances also provides significant benefits
for climate protection. The Act provides for a phase out of production and consumption
of ODS and requires controls on their use, including banning certain emissive uses,
requiring labeling to inform consumer choices, and requiring sound servicing practices
for the use of ODS in various products (e.g., air conditioning and refrigeration). The Act
also prohibits venting ODS or their substitutes, including other Fluorinated gases (F-
gases) such as hydrofluorocarbons (MFCs). As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol,
the U.S. is committed to ensuring that our domestic program is at least as stringent as
international obligations and to regulating and enforcing its terms domestically. In FY
2012, EPA will focus its work to ensure that ODS production and import caps under the
Montreal Protocol and Clean Air Act continue to be met.
Radiation
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to work with other federal agencies, states, Tribes,
stakeholders, and international radiation protection organizations to develop and use
voluntary and regulatory programs, public information, and training to reduce public
exposure to radiation. Responding to advances in uranium production processes and
mining operations, the Agency is updating its radiation protection standards for the
uranium fuel cycle, which were developed over 30 years ago, to ensure that they
continue to be protective of public health and the environment. In FY 2012, EPA's
Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT), a component of the Agency's
emergency response structure, will continue to ensure that it maintains and improves
the level of readiness to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery
operations under the National Response Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).
Research
In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing a
more integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of
individually. This approach will create synergy and yield benefits beyond those possible
from approaches that are more narrowly targeted to single chemicals or problem areas.
EPA is realigning and integrating the work of twelve of its base research programs into
four new research programs (further described in the Highlighted programs section of
the appendix):
• Air, Climate, and Energy
• Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
26
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
• Sustainable and Healthy Communities
• Chemical Safety and Sustainability
The new Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) program (Figure 1) integrates existing EPA
research programs on environmental and human health impacts related to air pollution,
mercury, climate change, and biofuels. Protecting human health and the environment
from the effects of air pollution and climate change, while sustainably meeting the
demands of a growing population and economy, is critical to the well-being of the nation
and the world. As we explore emerging technologies to reduce emissions, we are
challenged by uncertainties surrounding human health and environmental risks from
exposure to an evolving array of air pollutants. This multifaceted environment reflects
the interplay of air quality, the changing climate, and emerging energy options. By
integrating air, climate and energy research EPA will conduct research to understand
the complexity of these interactions and provide models and tools necessary for
communities and for policy makers at all levels of government to make the best
decisions.
The ACE research program is working with partners from across EPA, as well as
applicable external stakeholders, to identify the critical science questions that will be
addressed under three major research themes.
• Theme 1: Develop and evaluate multi-pollutant, regional, and sector-based
approaches and advance more cost-effective and innovative strategies to reduce
air emissions that adversely affect atmospheric integrity.
• Theme 2: Assess the impacts of atmospheric pollution, accounting for
interactions between climate change, air quality, and water quality.
• Theme 3: Provide environmental modeling, monitoring, metrics, and information
needed by communities to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
Figure 1: This illustrates the
EPA Research budget under
the FY 2012 Budget Request,
which includes 4 new
integrated programs and
continues 2 programs. The
new integrated Air, Climate
and Energy Research program
will address EPA Strategic
Plan Goal 1: Taking Action on
Climate Change and Ensuring
Air Quality. This budget
structure will maximize the
effectiveness and efficiency of
EPA's new integrated,
transdisciplinary approach to
research, which will catalyze
innovative, sustainable
solutions to the problems being
addressed by our research
partners.
RESEARCH:
EPA Labs, Centers &
Program Offices
INTEGRATED RESEARCH
SAFE&
SUSTAINA
WATER
RESOURCES
SUSTAINAB
fgiWTaWMTg
RESEARCH:
External Research
Partners
IEMICALSAFETY &
SUSTAINABILITY
27
-------
Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality
In FY 2012, the ACE research program will study the generation, fate, transport, and
chemical transformation of air emissions to identify individual and population health
risks. The program will incorporate air, climate, and biofuel research to ensure the
development of sustainable solutions and attainment of statutory goals in a complex
multipollutant environment. The ACE program will conduct research to better
understand and assess the effects of global change on air quality, water quality, aquatic
ecosystems, land use (e.g. for biofuel feedstocks), human health and social well being
and will conduct systems-based sustainability analyses that include environmental,
social and economic dimensions. Research will also determine how the use of new and
existing biofuels will affect critical ecosystem services and human health. The goal of
this work is to explore how modified behaviors and technology designs could decrease
the potential impacts of biofuels. EPA will continue to leverage the success of the
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program, which supports innovative and
cutting-edge research from scientists in academia through a competitive and peer-
reviewed grant process that is integrated with EPA's overall research efforts.
28
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Strategic Goal: Protect and restore our waters to ensure that drinking water Is safe,
and that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants and wildlife, and economic,
recreational, and subsistence activities.
Resource Summary
($ in 000)
^4
48.1%
m/
of Budget
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
FY 201 1
Annualized
CR
FY2012
President's
Budget
Difference
FY 2010 EN
to FY 201 2
PresBud
1 - Protect Human Health
2 - Protect and Restore Watersheds
and Aquatic Ecosystems
$1,837,338 $1,837,338 $1,369,962 ($467,376)
$3,808,001 $3,808,001 $2,972,683 ($835,318)
Goal 2 Total
$5,645,340 $5,645,340 $4,342,646 ($1,302,694)
Workyears
3,502
3,502
3,434
(68)
NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding.
FY2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
FY 2012 President's Budget totals exclude a $50 million cancellation, which will impact Goal 2.
Introduction
While much progress has been made, America's waters remain imperiled. From
nutrient loadings and stormwater runoff to invasive species and drinking water
contaminants, water quality and enforcement programs face complex challenges that
demand both traditional and innovative strategies. EPA will work hand-in-hand with
states and tribes to develop nutrient limits and intensify our work to restore and protect
the quality of the nation's streams, rivers, lakes, bays, oceans, and aquifers. We will
also use our authority to protect and restore threatened natural treasures such as the
Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico; to address our neglected
urban rivers; to ensure safe drinking water; and, to reduce pollution from nonpoint and
industrial dischargers. EPA will continue to work on measures to address post-
construction runoff, water-quality impairments from surface mining, and drinking water
contamination.
29
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Recent national surveys1 have found that our waters are stressed by nutrient pollution,
excess sedimentation, and degradation of shoreline vegetation, which affect upwards of
50 percent of our lakes and streams. The rate at which new waters are listed for water
quality impairments exceeds the pace at which restored waters are removed from the
list. For many years, nonpoint source pollution, principally nitrogen, phosphorus, and
sediments, has been recognized as the largest remaining impediment to improving
water quality. However, pollution discharged from industrial, municipal, agricultural, and
stormwater point sources continue to cause a decline in the quality of our waters. Other
significant contributors include loss of habitat and habitat fragmentation, and hydrologic
alteration.
To continue making progress, the Agency needs effective partnerships with the states,
tribes and communities. We will continue the increased focus on communities,
particularly those disadvantaged communities facing disproportionate impacts or having
been historically underserved.
As part of the Administration's long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable
Water Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with States and Communities to
enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity. Important to the technical
capacity will be enhancing alternatives analysis to expand "green infrastructure" options
and their multiple benefits. Future year budgets for the State Revolving Funds (SRFs)
gradually adjust, taking into account repayments, through 2016 with the goal of
providing, on average, about 5 percent of water infrastructure spending annually. When
coupled with increasing repayments from loans made in past years by states, the
annual funding will allow the SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water
and drinking water infrastructure. Federal dollars provided through the SRFs will act as
a catalyst for efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable
water infrastructure. Overall, the Administration requests a combined $2.5 billion for the
SRFs.
Major FY 2012 Investment Areas
Water Quality
The Section 106 grant program supports prevention and control measures that improve
water quality. In FY 2012, EPA is requesting a total additional investment of $21 million
in Section 106 funding of which $18.3 million will strengthen state and interstate
programs to address Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), nutrient and wet weather
issues. Approximately $2.7 million of the additional funding will be directed to eligible
tribes to meet funding needs for tribal water quality programs.
1 U.S. EPA, 2006. Wadeable Streams Assessment A Collaborative Survey of the Nation's Streams. EPA 841-B-
06-002. Available at http://www.epa.qov/owow/streamsurvev. See also EPA, 2010. National Lakes Assessment: A
Collaborative Survey of the Nation's Lakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/lakessurvev/pdf/nla chapter0.pdf.
30
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Drinking Water
In FY 2012, an additional $5.2 million is being requested to replace obsolete and
expensive to maintain drinking water information system technology, support state data
management, develop the capability to post drinking water compliance monitoring data
on a secured internet portal, facilitate compliance monitoring data collection and
transfer, and improve data quality. EPA, in concert with states, is working to collect and
display all compliance monitoring data as part of the Drinking Water Strategy. This
increase will also be used to replace SDWIS-State, reducing state need to keep
individual compliance databases.
Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions
• Reducing funds for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program, while
continuing federal support for safe drinking water, will result in fewer new
projects.
• Reducing funds for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, while continuing
federal support clean water infrastructure, will result in fewer projects.
• Reducing funds for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, while maintaining a
significant investment in activities such as sediment cleanup and habitat
restoration.
• Reducing funds for state Nonpoint Source grants will result in 100 to 150 fewer
projects as compared to 716 projects funded in FY 2010.
Priority Goals
EPA has established two Priority Goals to improve water quality. The Priority Goals
are:
Improve Water Quality: Chesapeake Bay
• Chesapeake Bay watershed states (including the District of Columbia) will
develop and submit approvable Phase I watershed implementation plans by the
end of CY 2010 and Phase II plans by the end of CY 2011 in support of EPA's
final Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL).
Improve Water Quality: Drinking Water Standards
• Over the next two years, EPA will initiate review/revision of at least 4 drinking
water standards to strengthen public health protection.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to track progress towards its Priority Goals and will
update goals as necessary and appropriate.
31
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
FY 2012 Activities
EPA has identified core water program activities within its safe and clean water
programs in FY 2012 to highlight three of the Administrator's priority areas: Urban
Waters, the Drinking Water Strategy, and Climate Change.
The National Water Program will continue to place emphasis on watershed stewardship,
watershed-based approaches, water efficiencies, and best practices through
Environmental Management Systems. EPA will specifically focus on green
infrastructure, nutrients, and trading among point sources and non-point sources for
water quality upgrades. In FY 2012, the Agency will continue advancing the water
quality monitoring initiative and a water quality standards strategy under the Clean
Water Act, as well as important rules and activities under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Related efforts to improve monitoring and surveillance will help advance water security
nationwide.
In FY 2012, the Agency will begin some new areas of activity, expand some existing
strategies, and discontinue others.
Drinking Water
To help achieve the Administrator's priority to protect America's waters, in FY 2012,
EPA will continue to implement the new Drinking Water Strategy, a new approach to
expanding public health protection for drinking water. The Agency will focus on
regulating groups of drinking water contaminants, improving water treatment
technology, utilizing the authority of multiple statutes where appropriate, and, expanding
its communication with states, tribes and communities, to increase confidence in the
quality of drinking water.
During FY 2012, EPA, the states, and community water systems will build on past
successes while working toward the FY 2012 goal of assuring that 91 percent of the
population served by community water systems receives drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based standards. States carry out a variety of activities, such as
conducting onsite sanitary surveys of water systems and working with small systems to
improve their capabilities. EPA will work to improve implementation by providing
guidance, training, and technical assistance; ensuring proper certification of water
system operators; promoting consumer awareness of drinking water safety; and
maintaining the rate of system sanitary surveys and onsite reviews to promote
compliance with drinking water standards.
To help ensure that water is safe to drink and because aging drinking water
infrastructure can impact water quality, EPA requests $990 million to continue EPA's
commitment for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. This request will fund new
infrastructure improvement projects for public drinking water systems. EPA will, in
concert with the states, focus this affordable, flexible financial assistance to support
utility compliance with safe drinking water standards. EPA will also work with utilities to
32
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
promote technical, financial, and managerial capacity as a critical means to meet
infrastructure needs, and further enhance program performance and efficiency.
Homeland Security
EPA has a major role in supporting the protection of the nation's critical water
infrastructure from terrorist threats. In FY 2012, EPA will continue efforts towards
protecting the nation's water infrastructure. In FY 2012, the Agency will provide
technical support to the existing Water Security Initiative (WSI) pilots, assist in
conducting outreach efforts to migrate lessons learned from the pilots to the water
sector, and develop and execute an approach to promote national voluntary adoption of
effective and sustainable drinking water contamination warning systems. The FY 2012
request includes $7.4 million for WSI pilot support and evaluation activities, as well as
dissemination of information and transfer of knowledge. Additionally, the FY 2012
request includes $1.3 million for Water Laboratory Alliance for threat reduction efforts.
Clean Water
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to collaborate with states and tribes to make progress
toward EPA's clean water goals. EPA's FY 2012 request includes a total of $444 million
in categorical grants for clean water programs. EPA will implement core clean water
programs and promising innovations on a watershed basis to accelerate water quality
improvements. Building on 30 years of clean water successes, EPA, in conjunction with
states and tribes, will implement the Clean Water Act by focusing on TMDLs and
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits built upon
scientifically sound water quality standards, technology-based pollutant discharge limits,
effective water monitoring, strong programs for controlling nonpoint sources of pollution,
stringent discharge permit programs, and revolving fund capitalization grants to our
partners to build, revive, and "green" our aging infrastructure.
WQ-8a
# of TMDLs that are established or approved by EPA
[Total TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with national
policy (cumulative)
50000
I Annual Target
I End-of-Year Results
2006
2007
2008 2009
2010
33
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
The Agency's FY 2012 request continues the monitoring initiative begun in 2005 to
strengthen the nationwide monitoring network and complete statistically-valid surveys of
the nation's waters. The results of these efforts are scientifically-defensible water
quality data and information essential for cleaning up and protecting the nation's waters.
Progress in improving coastal and ocean waters documented in the National Coastal
Condition Report, will focus on assessing coastal conditions, reducing vessel
discharges, implementing coastal nonpoint source pollution programs, managing
dredged material and supporting international marine pollution control. EPA will
continue to provide annual capitalization to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF) to enable EPA partners to improve wastewater treatment, non-point sources
of pollution, and estuary revitalization. Realizing the long-term benefits derived from the
CWSRF, EPA is continuing our CWSRF commitment by requesting $1.55 billion in FY
2012.
By integrating sustainable community efforts and urban water quality efforts, EPA plans
to assist communities, particularly underserved communities, in restoring their urban
waters. EPA will help communities become active participants in restoration and
protection by helping to increase their awareness and stewardship of local urban
waters. Safe and clean urban waters can enhance economic, educational, recreational,
and social opportunities. By linking water quality improvement activities to these
community priorities and partnering with federal, state, local, and non-governmental
partners, EPA will help to sustain local commitment over the longer time frame that is
required for water quality improvement. In FY 2012, EPA will provide grants to
reconnect communities with their local urban waters and engage them in local
restoration efforts. Focus areas may include: promoting green infrastructure to reduce
contaminated, urban runoff; promoting volunteer monitoring; and tailoring outreach to
communities. As urban waters impact large populations in both urban and upstream
areas, this grants program will offer visibility to innovative approaches for water quality
improvement that can be adapted in surrounding communities, thus promoting
replication of successful practices.
EPA will continue to address climate change impacts to water resource programs as
well as to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions resulting from water activities by building
capacity to consider climate change as core missions under the Clean Water Act and
Safe Drinking Water Act are implemented. Climate change will exacerbate water quality
stressors such as stormwater and nutrient pollution and could add new stressors such
as those related to the expanding renewable energy development. WaterSense,
Climate Ready Estuaries, Climate Ready Water Utilities and Green Infrastructure are
examples of programs that will help stakeholders adapt to climate change in FY 2012,
and programs targeted at vulnerable populations will be increasingly important. Efforts
to incorporate climate change considerations into key programs will help protect water
quality as well as the nation's investment in drinking water and wastewater treatment
infrastructure.
34
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
Geographic Water Programs
The Administration has launched numerous cross-agency collaborations to promote
coordination among agencies toward achieving Presidential priorities, which include a
suite of large aquatic ecosystem restoration efforts. Three prominent examples of this
kind of cross-agency collaboration for EPA are cooperative restoration efforts in the
Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. These three large water bodies
have been exposed to substantial pollution over many years and a coordinated federal
response is critical for maintaining progress on environmental priorities. Coastal
estuaries and wetlands are also vulnerable. Working with stakeholders, EPA has
established special programs to protect and restore each of these unique resources.
EPA's ecosystem protection programs encompass a wide range of approaches that
address specific at-risk regional areas and larger categories of threatened systems,
such as urban waters, estuaries, and wetlands. Locally generated pollution, combined
with pollution carried by rivers and streams and through air deposition, can accumulate
in these ecosystems and degrade them over time. EPA and Federal partners will
continue to coordinate with States, Tribes, municipalities, and industry to restore the
integrity of imperiled waters of the United States.
Great Lakes:
EPA is providing $350 million in funding for ecosystem restoration efforts for the Great
Lakes, the largest freshwater system in the world. This EPA-led interagency effort to
restore the Great Lakes focuses on priority environmental issues such as contaminated
sediments and toxics, nonpoint source pollution, habitat degradation and loss, and
invasive species.
To restore and protect this national treasure, the Obama Administration developed the
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). Led by EPA, the GLRI invests in the region's
environmental and public health through a coordinated interagency process. Principal
agencies involved in the GLRI are USDA, NOAA, HHS, DHS, HUD, DOS, DOD-Army,
DOI, and DOT. In FY 2012, EPA will continue to lead the implementation of the Great
Lakes Restoration Initiative, implementing both federal projects and projects with states,
tribes, municipalities, universities, and other organizations. Progress will continue in
each of the GLRI's five focus areas through implementation of on-the-ground actions.
The GLRI provides the level of investment and the interagency coordination required to
successfully address these five issues across the region. The initiative will specifically
target work to restore beneficial uses in Areas of Concern, including Great Lakes
Legacy Act projects, nearshore work, and habitat restoration, prioritizing delistings of
Areas of Concern.
The initiative identifies $350 million for programs and projects strategically chosen to
target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem, a
$125 million decrease from FY 2010, the first year of the initiative. The initiative will
implement the most important projects for Great Lakes Restoration and achieve visible
results. FY 2012 activities will emphasize implementation and include grants to
35
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
implement the Initiative by funding states, tribes and other partners. EPA expects
substantial progress within each of the Initiative's focus areas by focusing on the
following actions within them:
• Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern: EPA is working closely with non-
Federal partners to address beneficial use impairments in areas of concern
including Great Lakes Legacy Act clean-ups of contaminated sediments.
• Invasive Species: GLRI has supported priority Asian Carp work including^
the installation of structures by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USAGE)
at the electric barrier site to reduce the risk of bypass by Asian carpj and Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Illinois Department of Natural Resource
efforts to detect and remove Asian Carp from the system. As needed, GLRI
will invest in additional efforts to keep Asian Carp from becoming established
in the Great Lakes while continuing to address Invasive Species -priorities
such as the development of Ballast Water Treatment technologies; assistance
to states and communities in preventing the introduction of invasive species
and controlling existing populations; establishing early detection and rapid
response capabilities; and the implementation of Aquatic Nuisance Species
Management Plans by the FWS partnership.
• Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source: Targeted watershed plan
implementation will be undertaken by EPA, U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), FWS, USGS, state
programs, and tribal governments. Additionally, GLRI funds have been
marked for NRCS to work directly with agricultural producers in specific, high
priority watersheds to install conservation practices on their operations to
reduce soil erosion and non-point source nutrient loading to waters of the
Great Lakes Basin.
• Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration: GLRI funding has been
targeted for FWS efforts to fund projects related to species and habitat
management such as restoring wetlands, improving the hydrology of Great
Lakes tributaries, reforesting habitats, reducing impacts of invasive species,
and creating and/or improving corridors between habitats. Additionally,
NRCS supports habitat restoration and protection efforts of agricultural lands
through the programs such as the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program
• Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication, and
Partnerships: EPA's National Coastal Condition Assessment will provide a
framework and organization for a Comprehensive Great Lakes Coastal
Assessment that will establish baseline conditions of environmental quality
and variability of the near-shore waters, bottom substrate, and biota. All
agencies will participate in the Great Lakes Accountability System where
partner agencies will report quality controlled information regularly on GLRI
progress in meeting the objectives and targets of this Action Plan.
EPA expects to reach a target of 23.9 using a 40.0 scale for improving the overall
ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by preventing water pollution and protect aquatic
36
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
systems. Also by FY 2012, EPA expects to have removed 26 beneficial use
impairments from AOCs within the basin.
Chesapeake Bay:
Increased funding for the Chesapeake Bay will support Bay watershed States as they
implement their plans to reduce nutrient and sediment pollution in an unprecedented
effort to restore this economically important ecosystem. President Obama's 2009
Executive Order (EO) tasked a team of federal agencies to draft a way forward for
protection and restoration of the Chesapeake watershed. This team—the Federal
Leadership Committee (FLC) for the Chesapeake Bay—is chaired by the Administrator
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and includes senior representatives from
the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior and
Transportation.
The FLC developed the Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed, which was released in May 2010. Work that has taken place under the EO
can be categorized according to the Goal Areas and Supporting Strategies identified in
the EO Strategy, specifically around its four "Goal Areas" of work:
• Restore Water Quality: Examples of efforts in this area include: EPA
issuance of a TMDL for nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment to meet water
quality standards; USDA development of suites of conservation practices to
improve water quality and targeting of technical and financial assistance in
high-priority watersheds; EPA/DOI/NOAA research and partnerships to
address toxic pollutant contamination in the Bay
• Restore Habitat: Examples of efforts in this area include: the partnership
among USFWS, NOAA, USGS, NRCS, FHWA, and NPS to restore and
enhance wetlands and to conduct supporting research; the partnership
among USDA, USFS, and USFWS to restore riparian forest buffers; work by
USFWS, NOAA, and NRCS to restore historical fish migratory routes; and
work by Federal agencies in general, including USFWS, USGS, NOAA, EPA,
USAGE, NRCS, and USFS, to strengthen science support for habitat
restoration
• Sustain Fish and Wildlife: Examples of efforts in this area include: work by
NOAA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to restore native
oyster habitat and populations; NOAA's work to rebuild the blue crab
population target; work by USFWS, USFS, and NOAA to restore brook trout,
black duck, and other species; NRCS's work to support the establishment and
protection of terrestrial habitat on private lands; the partnership among
NOAA, USAGE, USFWS, USGS, states and local organizations to strengthen
science support to sustain fish and wildlife.
• Conserve Land and Increase Public Access: Examples of efforts in this
area include: collaboration among DOI, USDA, NOAA, DOT, DOD, states and
local agencies on the launch of a Chesapeake Treasured Landscape
Initiative; work by NPS, USFWS, USDA, NOAA, USGS, DOT, and HUD on
coordinated conservation actions, watershed-wide CIS-based land
37
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
conservation targeting system, and developing integrated transportation, land
use, housing and water infrastructure plans for smart growth.
The $67.4 million Chesapeake Bay program FY 2012 budget request will allow EPA to
continue to implement the President's Executive Order (E.G.) on Chesapeake Bay
Protection and Restoration, to implement the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily
Load (TMDL), to facilitate coordination of goals and activities of federal, state and local
partners in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, to support the Chesapeake Bay
jurisdictions in implementing the TMDL, to assist program partners in their protection
and restoration efforts, to increase the accountability and transparency of the program,
to continue responding to oversight reports, and to address other priority initiatives as
they arise.
The Chesapeake Bay TMDL, the nation's largest and most complex TMDL, will
necessitate significant scientific, technical, and programmatic support to states and local
jurisdictions in developing and implementing the most appropriate programs for meeting
their responsibilities under the TMDL allocations. EPA has engaged multiple programs
and offices to provide the regulatory, legal, enforcement, and technical support
necessary to meet these challenges.
EPA is committed to its ambitious long-term goals of 100 percent attainment of
dissolved oxygen standards in waters of the Chesapeake Bay and 185,000 acres of
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). Along with its federal and state partners, EPA
has stated its intention to establish two-year milestones for all actions needed to restore
water quality, habitats, and fish and shellfish.
Other Geographic Programs:
In FY 2012 EPA will continue cooperation with federal, state and Tribal governments
and other stakeholders toward achieving the national goal of no net loss of wetlands
under the Clean Water Action Section 404 regulatory program. The FY 2012 budget
request for NEPs and coastal watersheds is $27.5 million to help accomplish a target of
100,000 acres protected or restored within National Estuary Program study areas.
After the recent catastrophe from the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, President Obama
signed Executive Order 13554 which established the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration
Task Force, chaired by EPA Administrator Jackson. The Task Force will serve as the
Federal lead in Gulf Coast restoration, building off of the tremendous early efforts of the
Working Group, the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, and others, while working to assist the
Deepwater Horizon NRD Trustee Council. The Trustee Council will focus on restoring,
rehabilitating, or replacing the natural resources damaged by the oil spill, while the Task
Force and its Federal agency partners will focus their individual efforts on the broader
suite of impacts afflicting the Gulf Coast region. The Task Force will provide a broad
vision and strategy to guide federal cooperative efforts to address the degradation of
this region and to reverse longstanding problems that have contributed to its decline.
38
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
The Executive Order tasked the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force with
developing a Gulf of Mexico Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy within one year.
The Strategy will identify major policy areas where coordinated Federal-state action is
necessary and will also consider existing restoration planning efforts in the region to
identify planning gaps and restoration needs, both on a state-by-state basis and on a
broad regional scale, setting milestones and performance indicators by which to
measure progress of the long-term restoration effort. This strategy, combined with the
NRD restoration plan, will likely serve to inform Federal investments in ecosystem
restoration in the Gulf region over the next decade. EPA will provide assistance to other
federal, state, and local partners to ensure that the water, wetlands, and beaches will be
restored, and the surrounding communities will be revitalized.
As a complement to the Agency's actions in the immediate Gulf coast, EPA's
Mississippi River Basin program will address excessive nutrient loadings that contribute
to water quality impairments in the basin and, ultimately, to hypoxic conditions in the
Gulf of Mexico. Working with the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force, Gulf of Mexico Alliance and
other states within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basins, and other federal agencies,
EPA will help target efforts within 2-3 critical watersheds to implement effective
strategies that can yield significant progress in addressing nonpoint source nutrient
pollution.
Research
In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing
an integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of
individually. This approach will allow EPA to consider a broader set of issues and
objectives while bridging traditional scientific disciplines. EPA is realigning and
integrating the work of twelve of its base research programs into four new research
programs (as discussed further in the Goal 1 overview and appendix):
• Air, Climate, and Energy
• Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
• Sustainable and Healthy Communities
• Chemical Safety and Sustainability
EPA will use these integrated research programs to develop a deeper understanding of
our environmental challenges and inform sustainable solutions to meet our strategic
goals. In FY 2012, the Agency proposes to realign elements of the Water Quality and
Drinking Water research programs into the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research (SSWR) Program.
Increased demands, land use practices, population growth, aging infrastructure, and
climate variability, pose challenges to our nation's water resources. Such competing
interests require the development of innovative new solutions for water resource
managers and other decision makers. To address these challenges, EPA research will
enable the following in FY 2012:
39
-------
Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters
• Protection and restoration of watersheds to provide water quality necessary for
sustained ecosystem health.
• Treatment technologies and management strategies needed to ensure water is
safe to drink.
• Water infrastructure capable of the sustained delivery of safe water, providing for
the removal and treatment of wastewater consistent with its sustainable and safe
re-use, and management of stormwater in a manner that values it as a resource
and a component of sustainable water resources.
The new SSWR research program will address and adapt to future water resources
management needs to ensure that natural and engineered water systems have the
capacity and resiliency to meet current and future water needs to support the range of
growing water-use and ecological requirements.
Through the SSWR program, the research program is investing an additional $6.1
million to address potential water supply endangerments associated with hydraulic
fracturing (HF). Congress has urged EPA to conduct this research, which supports the
Agency's efforts to ensure the protection of our aquifers. The Agency proposes to
conduct additional case studies on a greater number of geographic and geologic
situations to reflect the range of conditions under which HF operates, and on HF
practices that will help more fully characterize the factors that may lead to risks to public
health. In addition, the Agency will develop models to assess risk to water resources
based on geologic, geographic, hydrologic, toxicological and biogeochemical factors
and thus support identification of situations that could be more susceptible to infiltration
from hydraulic fracturing fluids.
Within the SSWR program, green infrastructure research will continue to assess,
develop, and compile scientifically rigorous tools and models that will be used by EPA's
Office of Water, states, and municipalities. EPA will continue to leverage the success of
the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program, which supports innovative and
cutting-edge research from scientists in academia through a competitive and peer-
reviewed grant process that is integrated with EPA's overall research efforts.
40
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing
Sustainable Development
Strategic Goal: Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and
protect disproportionately Impacted low-Income, minority, and tribal communities.
Prevent releases of harmful substances and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
22.4% of Budget
Resource Summary
($ in 000)
Difference
FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2010 EN
Enacted Annualized President's to FY 2012
Budget CR Budget PresBud
1 - Promote Sustainable and Livable
Communities
2 - Preserve Land
3 - Restore Land
4 - Strengthen Human Health and
Environmental Protection in Indian
Country
$522,239 $520,239 $504,465 ($17,774)
$273,342 $273,342 $264,903 ($8,439)
$1,198,660 $1,198,660 $1,133,624 ($65,035)
$80,827 $80,827 $114,069 $33,243
Goal 3 Total
$2,075,067 $2,073,067 $2,017,062 ($58,005)
Workyears
4,484
4,484
4,338
(146)
NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding.
FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
FY 2012 President's Budget totals exclude a $50 million cancellation, which will impact Goal 3.
Introduction
Land is one of America's most valuable resources and EPA strives to clean up
communities to create a safer environment for all Americans. Hazardous and non-
hazardous wastes on the land can migrate to the air, groundwater and surface water,
contaminating drinking water supplies, causing acute illnesses or chronic diseases, and
threatening healthy ecosystems in urban, rural, and suburban areas. EPA will continue
efforts to prevent and reduce the risks posed by releases of harmful substances to land;
to clean up communities; to strengthen state and Tribal partnerships; and to expand the
conversation on environmentalism and work for environmental justice. The Agency also
will work to advance sustainable development and to protect disproportionately
41
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
impacted low-income, minority, and Tribal communities through outreach and protection
efforts for communities historically underrepresented in EPA decision-making.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to work collaboratively with state and Tribal partners to
prevent and reduce exposure to contaminants. Improved compliance at high risk oil and
chemical facilities through rulemaking and increased inspections will help prevent
exposure by encouraging compliance with environmental regulations. This is another
focus of the FY 2012 investments. In order to address exposures to releases that have
already occurred and/or will occur in the future, EPA will continue implement the
Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) program. The purpose of ICI is to coordinate the
relevant tools available in each of the clean-up programs in order to accelerate the pace
of cleanups in the most effective and efficient manner to appropriately service
communities. These efforts will be supported by sound scientific data, research, and
cost-effective tools that alert EPA to emerging issues and inform Agency decisions on
managing materials and addressing contaminated properties.
Improving a community's ability to make decisions that affect its environment is at the
heart of EPA's community-centered work. Challenging and complex environmental
problems, such as contaminated soil, sediment, and groundwater that can cause human
health concerns, persist at many contaminated properties. The burden of a single
blighted and contaminated site, or multiple blighted and contaminated sites
concentrated within an area, can weigh down an entire community. Oftentimes, there is
no obvious reuse for a contaminated property and communities struggle with what will
happen at the site. This dilemma results in long-term environmental and economic
community distress. As multiple sites are often connected through infrastructure and
geographic location, approaching the assessment and cleanup needs of the entire area
can be more effective than focusing on individual sites in isolation of the surrounding
area.
Many communities across the country regularly face risks posed by intentional and
accidental releases of harmful substances into the environment. EPA and its state
partners issue, update, or maintain RCRA permits for approximately 2,500 hazardous
waste facilities. In addition, there are over 1,627 sites total on NPL nationwide.
Contaminants at these hazardous waste sites are often complex chemical mixtures
affecting multiple environmental media. In other words, operations at a site may have
contaminated groundwater, surface water, and soil, at times also impacting indoor and
outdoor air quality. The precise impact of many contaminant mixtures on human health
remains uncertain; however, substances commonly found at Superfund sites have been
linked to a variety of human health problems, such as birth defects, infertility, cancer,
and changes in neurobehavioral functions. In FY 2012, EPA will continue its work to
cleanup, redevelop, and revitalize contaminated sites.
There is a critical need for the Agency to increase its capacity to prevent and respond to
accidental releases of harmful substances, including oil spills, by developing clear
authorities, training personnel, and providing proper equipment. Recent spills and
releases at oil and chemical facilities have resulted in human injuries and deaths,
42
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
severe environmental damage, and great financial loss. The BP Deepwater Horizon
(DWH) oil spill disaster resulted in 11 deaths, millions of gallons of spilled oil, and untold
environmental damage. Likewise, accidents reported to EPA by the current universe of
Risk Management Program (RMP) facilities have resulted in over 40 worker deaths,
nearly 1,500 worker injuries, more than 300,000 people sheltered in place, and more
than $1 billion in on-site and off-site damages. EPA will increase its capacity for
compliance monitoring and inspections at these facilities in FY 2012.
Major FY 2012 Investment Areas
Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in High Risk Oil and Chemical
Facilities
The Oil Spill program helps protect U.S. waters by effectively preventing, preparing for,
responding to, and monitoring oil spills. EPA also works with state and local partners
through the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness Program to help protect the
public and the environment from catastrophic releases of hazardous substances that
occur at chemical facilities. EPA currently conducts over 550 inspections at chemical
facilities per year (approximately 5 percent of the universe of RMP facilities in non-
delegated states) and 1,100 SPCC inspections and 250 FRP inspections and drills at
oil facilities per year (0.2 percent of the universe of 640,000 SPCC facilities, 6 percent at
FRP facilities). In FY 2012, the Agency will expand its current prevention activities at
high risk oil and chemical facilities by investing $1 million and 5 FTE to increase
oversight of high risk chemical facilities; $5.1 million and 16 FTE to increase inspections
of high risk oil facilities; and $1.4 million and 1 FTE to improve compliance and develop
a new database as part of leveraging technology to enhance EPA's compliance efforts
under the Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas initiative.
Support for Tribes
As the largest single source of EPA funding to tribes, the Tribal General Assistance
Program (GAP) provides grants to build capacity to administer environmental programs
that may be authorized by EPA in Indian country. These grants provide technical
assistance in the development of programs to address environmental issues on Indian
lands. An $8.5 million increase to funding for GAP grants will build tribal capacity and
assists tribes in leveraging other EPA and federal funding to contribute towards a higher
overall level of environmental and human health protection.
Many tribes have expressed the need to start implementing high priority environmental
programs, but GAP funding may only be used for capacity building. Increasing GAP
grant funding will allow tribes to continue to develop stronger, more sustainable
environmental programs, while allowing more tribes to take advantage of the new multi-
media tribal implementation program. The $20 million investment in a new multi-media
tribal implementation grant program will support tribes in addressing individual tribe's
most serious environmental needs through the implementation of environmental
programs and projects, an ongoing top priority for both tribes and the Agency.
43
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions
In order to promote fiscal responsibility EPA is also making the tough choices, including:
• Reducing FTE and funding for waste minimization activities as the program is
redirected to sustainable materials management and existing efforts aimed at
promoting the reduction, reuse and recycling of municipal solid waste and industrial
materials are discontinued or scaled back.
• Reducing resources devoted to Regional response activities under the Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal program, continuing to focus on encouraging
PRPs to conduct removal actions and looking for ways to find efficiencies and lessen
the impact of the reduction.
• Reducing Federal Facilities and Restoration Program work at non-NPL sites cleaned
up by other federal agencies and focusing efforts on meeting statutory oversight
responsibilities at federal NPL sites.
• Reducing Superfund remedial construction funding which may have the effect of
postponing new remedial construction starts, slowing down the pace of ongoing
construction projects, and delaying certain site assessment and characterization
projects. EPA is exploring program efficiencies that may be achieved to limit the
impact of this reduction.
• Decreasing funding for the Agency's homeland security response and preparedness
program while maintaining the current level of preparedness.
Priority Goal
EPA has established a Priority Goal to highlight progress made under the Brownfields
Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program. The Priority Goal is:
• By 2012 EPA will have initiated 20 enhanced Brownfields community level projects
that will include a new area-wide planning effort to benefit under-served and
economically disadvantaged communities. This will allow those communities to
assess and address a single large or multiple Brownfields sites within their
boundaries, thereby advancing area-wide planning to enable redevelopment of
Brownfields properties on a broader scale. EPA will provide technical assistance,
coordinate its enforcement, water and air quality programs, and work with other
Federal agencies, states, tribes and local governments to implement associated
targeted environmental improvements identified in each community's area-wide
plan.
EPA awarded Brownfields Area-Wide Planning assistance to 23 pilot communities in FY
2011. Consistent with EPA's Priority Goal commitment, throughout FY 2012 the 23 pilot
44
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
communities will continue to use the grant and/or direct contract assistance they
received from EPA to initiate development of a brownfields area-wide plan and
determine the next steps and resources needed to implement the plan. In FY 2012,
EPA will continue to track progress towards its priority goals and will update goals as
necessary and appropriate.
FY 2012 Activities
Work under this Goal supports 4 objectives: 1) Promote Sustainable and Livable
Communities, 2) Preserve Land; 3) Restore Land; and 4) Strengthen Human Health and
Environmental Protection in Indian Country. It is also supported by science and
research to enhance and strengthen these objectives.
Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to use several approaches to promote sustainable,
healthier communities and protect vulnerable populations and disproportionately
impacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities. The Agency especially is
concerned about threats to sensitive populations, such as children, the elderly, and
individuals with chronic diseases.
Brownfields:
EPA's Brownfields program supports states, local communities, and Tribes in their
efforts to assess and clean up potentially contaminated and lightly contaminated sites
within their jurisdiction. This support includes emphasis and participation in
Administration-wide initiatives such as the America's Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative
(promoting urban parks and greenways) and the Partnership for Sustainable
Communities (supporting area-wide planning for sustainable redevelopment). EPA will
provide technical assistance for Brownfields redevelopment in cities in transition which
are areas struggling with high unemployment as a result of structural changes to their
economies. In addition, the Brownfields program works closely with EPA's Smart
Growth program to address critical issues for Brownfields redevelopment, including land
assembly, development permitting issues, financing, parking and street standards,
accountability to uniform systems of information for land use controls, and other factors
that influence the economic viability of Brownfields redevelopment. The best practices,
tools, and lessons learned from the smart growth program will directly inform and assist
EPA's efforts to increase area-wide planning for assessment, cleanup, and
redevelopment of Brownfields sites.
Smart Growth:
The Agency's Smart Growth Program works across and within EPA and other federal
agencies to help communities grow in ways that strengthen their economies, protect the
environment, and preserve their heritage. This program focuses on streamlining,
concentrating, and leveraging state and federal assistance in places with the greatest
need. By concentrating and leveraging federal and state resources in areas with
specific needs, EPA hopes to create an inviting atmosphere for economic development
45
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
on which urban, suburban, and rural communities can capitalize. In FY 2012, EPA will
continue its strong support for the Federal DOT, HUD, and EPA Partnership for
Sustainable Communities, promote smart growth, and provide green building technical
assistance to states and local communities. EPA will also continue to develop
additional tools to best assist communities, particularly those that are disadvantaged or
have been adversely impacted by contamination and environmental degradation, in
implementing sustainable community strategies and approaches.
Environmental Justice:
EPA is committed to ensuring environmental justice regardless of race, color, national
origin, or income. Recognizing that minority and/or low-income communities frequently
may be exposed disproportionately to environmental harm and risks, the Agency works
to protect these communities from adverse health and environmental effects and to
ensure they are given the opportunity to participate meaningfully in environmental
decisions, including clean-ups. In FY 2012, EPA's Environmental Justice (EJ) program
will intensify its efforts to incorporate environmental justice considerations in the
rulemaking process. An ongoing challenge for EPA has been to develop rules that
implement existing statutory authority while working to reduce disproportionate
exposure and impacts from multiple sources. In FY 2012, the EJ program will work to
apply effective methods suitable for decision-making involving disproportionate
environmental health impacts on minority, low-income, and Tribal populations. EPA is
also working on technical guidance to support the integration of EJ considerations in
analysis that support EPA's actions.
Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE):
In FY 2012, EPA will continue its successful and innovative Community Action for a
Renewed Environment (CARE) program to assist distressed communities in addressing
critical human health and environmental risks. Since its launch in 2005, the CARE
program has awarded 91 grants to communities across 39 states to address key
environmental priorities and achieved results in predominantly environmental justice
communities. Since CARE is a multi-media program, projects often address more than
one medium. To date, Fifty percent of the grants have addressed air pollution; 50
percent chemical safety; 30 percent cleanup of contaminated lands; 30 percent water
issues; and 25 percent climate change. With the FY 2012 funding, the CARE program
will reach approximately 10 new communities. EPA will provide technical support for
underserved and other communities, help them use collaborative processes to select
and implement local actions, and award federal funding for projects to reduce exposure
to pollutants and local environmental problems. Under this program, EPA will create -
and in several Regions pilot - a Partners Program to provide technical support and
access to EPA programs while outside organizations provide funding to the community.
The Partners Program will provide the opportunity to leverage EPA's investment and
allow CARE to reach more communities than EPA could with increased grant funding
alone.
46
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
U.S.-Mexico Border:
The U.S.-Mexico Border region hosts a growing population of more than 14.6 million
people, posing unique drinking water and wastewater infrastructure shortages. In
addition, 432 thousand of the over 14 million people in the region live in 1,200 colonias1
which are unincorporated communities characterized by substandard housing and
unsafe drinking water. The Border 2012 framework agreement is intended to protect
the environment and public health along the U.S.-Mexico Border region, consistent with
the principles of sustainable development. The key areas of focus for EPA's Border
2012 Program continue to include: 1) increasing access to drinking water and
wastewater infrastructure; 2) building greenhouse gas (GHG) information capacity and
expanding voluntary energy efficiency reduction programs to achieve GHG reduction; 3)
developing institutional capacity to manage municipal solid waste; 4) piloting projects
that reduce exposure to pesticides; 5) conducting bi-national emergency preparedness
training and exercises at sister cities; and 6) continuing to test and update the
emergency notification mechanism between Mexico and the United States. In addition,
in FY 2012, EPA also will focus its efforts towards the development of the next
generation of the Border program.
Preserve and Restore Land
EPA leads the country's activities to prevent and reduce the risks posed by releases of
harmful substances and to preserve and restore land with effective waste management
and cleanup methods. In FY 2012, the Agency is requesting $1.4 billion to continue to
apply the most effective approach to preserve and restore land by developing and
implementing prevention programs, improving response capabilities, and maximizing
the effectiveness of response and cleanup actions. This approach will help ensure that
human health and the environment are protected and that land is returned to beneficial
use.
In FY 2012, EPA also will continue to use a hierarchy of approaches to protect the land:
reducing waste at its source, recycling waste, managing waste effectively by preventing
spills and releases of toxic materials, and cleaning up contaminated properties. The
Agency especially is concerned about threats to sensitive populations, such as children,
the elderly, and individuals with chronic diseases, and prioritizes cleanups accordingly.2
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA, or Superfund) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
provide legal authority for EPA's work to protect the land. The Agency and its partners
use Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites,
allowing land to be returned to productive use. Under RCRA, EPA works in partnership
with states and tribes to address risks associated with leaking underground storage
tanks and to manage solid and hazardous waste.
1 http://www.borderhealth.orq/border region.php
2 Additional information on these programs can be found at: www.epa.qov/superfund,
http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/er_cleanup.htm, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/.
http://www.epa.qov/brownfields/. http://www.epa.qov/swerust1/. http://www.epa.gov/swerffrr/ and
http://www.epa.gov/swerrims/landrevitalization.
47
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
In FY 2012, EPA will work to preserve and restore the nation's land by ensuring proper
management of waste and petroleum products, reducing waste generation, increasing
recycling and by strengthening its cleanup programs and oversight of oil and chemical
facilities. These efforts are integrated with the Agency's efforts to promote sustainable
and livable communities. EPA's land program activities for FY 2012 include seven
broad efforts: 1) Integrated Cleanup Initiative; 2) Land Cleanup and Revitalization; 3)
RCRA Waste Management and Corrective Action; 4) Recycling and Waste
Minimization; 5) Underground Storage Tanks management; 6) Oil Spills and Chemical
Safety, and 7) Homeland Security.
Integrated Cleanup Initiative:
In an effort to improve the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of EPA's
cleanup programs, EPA initiated the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI), a multi-year
effort to better use the most appropriate assessment and cleanup authorities to address
a greater number of sites, accelerate cleanups, and put those sites back into productive
use while protecting human health and the environment. By bringing to bear the
relevant tools available in each of the cleanup programs, including enforcement, EPA
will better leverage the resources available to address needs at individual sites. In FY
2012, EPA will continue to examine all aspects of the cleanup programs, identifying key
process improvements and enhanced efficiencies. In addition, in order to better
measure the performance and progress made in advancing cleanups and addressing
potentially contaminated sites, EPA developed two new performance measures under
ICI that will support comprehensive management of the cleanup life cycle: Site
Assessments (to track all of the sites for which EPA performs an assessment of
environmental condition) and Remedial Action Project Completions (to track the
progress in completing phases of constructing the remedy at Superfund sites). When
added to the existing suite of performance measures, EPA's measures now address
three critical points in the cleanup process—starting, advancing, and completing site
cleanup.
EPA also will implement its Community Engagement Initiative designed to enhance
involvement with local communities and stakeholders so that they may meaningfully
participate in decisions on land cleanup, emergency response, and management of
hazardous substances and waste. The goals of this initiative are to ensure transparent
and accessible decision-making processes, deliver information that communities can
use to participate meaningfully, and help EPA produce outcomes that are more
responsive to community perspectives and that ensure timely cleanup decisions.
Land Cleanup and Revitalization:
In addition to promoting sustainable and livable communities, EPA's cleanup programs
(e.g., Superfund Remedial, Superfund Federal Facilities Response, Superfund
Emergency Response and Removal, RCRA Corrective Action, Brownfields, and
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) Cooperative Agreements) and their
partners are taking proactive steps to facilitate the cleanup and revitalization of
contaminated properties. In FY 2012, the Agency will continue to help communities
48
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
clean up and revitalize these once productive properties by removing contamination,
helping limit urban sprawl, fostering ecologic habitat enhancements, enabling economic
development, taking advantage of existing infrastructure, and maintaining or improving
quality of life. In addition, EPA will continue to support the RE-Powering America's
Land initiative3 in partnership with the Department of Energy. These projects advance
cleaner and more cost effective energy technologies, and reduce the environmental
impacts of energy systems.
RCRA Waste Management and Corrective Action:
In FY 2012, the Agency will continue to work in partnership with the states to coordinate
RCRA program goals and direction. EPA will continue to assist states in permit
development, permit renewals, or other approved controls at facilities that treat, store, or
dispose of hazardous waste. EPA will work to meet its annual target of implementing
initial approved or updated controls at 100 RCRA hazardous waste management
facilities. In addition to meeting these goals, the program is responsible for the
continued maintenance of the regulatory controls at approximately 2,500 facilities in the
permitting baseline.4
EPA's RCRA Corrective Action program will focus on site investigation, identification of
interim remedies to eliminate exposures to human health or the environment, and
selection of safe, effective long-term remedies. Sites will see the results of this funding
in FY 2012 and beyond, as the number of sites achieving the Agency's environmental
indicators including control of human exposures and migration of contaminated
groundwater increase over time.
Recycling and Waste Minimization:
In FY 2012, EPA will complete this program's redirection to sustainable materials
management. This redirection is a significant step that will allow EPA to consider the
human health and environmental impacts associated with the full lifecycle of materials—
from the amount and toxicity of raw materials extraction, through transportation,
processing, manufacturing, and use, as well as re-use, recycling and disposal.
The EPAct and Underground Storage Tanks:
The EPAct5 contains numerous provisions that significantly affect federal and state
underground storage tank (LIST) programs and requires that EPA and states strengthen
tank release and prevention programs. In FY 2012, EPA will provide assistance to
states to help them meet their EPAct responsibilities, which include: 1) mandatory
inspections every three years for all underground storage tanks and enforcement of
violations discovered during the inspections; 2) operator training; 3) prohibition of
3 Additional information on this initiative can be found on http://www.epa.qov/renewableenerqvland/.
4 The permitting baseline universe currently has 2,446 facilities with approximately 10,000 process unit groups.
5 For more information, refer to http://frwebqate.access.qpo.gov/cqi-
bin/qetdoc.cqi?dbname=109 conq public Iaws&docid=f:publ058.109.pdf (scroll to Title XV - Ethanol And Motor
Fuels, Subtitle B- Underground Storage Tank Compliance, on pages 500-513 of the pdf file).
49
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
delivery for non-complying facilities6; and 4) secondary containment or financial
responsibility for tank manufacturers and installers.
Additionally, there are an unknown number of petroleum Brownfields sites that are
predominately old gas stations that blight the environmental and economic health of
surrounding neighborhoods. In FY 2012, EPA's LIST and Brownfields program will
continue to jointly focus attention and resources on the cleanup and reuse of petroleum-
contaminated sites.
Oil Spills and Chemical Safety:
The Oil Spill program helps protect U.S. waters by effectively preventing, preparing for,
responding to, and monitoring oil spills. EPA conducts oil spill prevention,
preparedness, and enforcement activities associated with the 640,000 non-
transportation-related oil storage facilities that EPA regulates through its Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) program. EPA currently conducts
approximately 1,100 inspections per year at SPCC-regulated facilities (representing 0.2
percent of the total universe of 640,000) and 250 FRP inspections and drills at 6 percent
of the FRP facilities. In FY 2012, as part of the Oil Spill investments, the Agency will
broaden and expand its prevention and preparedness activities.
In addition to its prevention responsibilities, EPA serves as the lead responder for
cleanup of all inland zone spills, including transportation-related spills from pipelines,
trucks, and other transportation systems and provides technical assistance and support
to the U.S. Coast Guard for coastal and maritime oil spills. In FY 2012, EPA will
continue to review and revise, as appropriate, the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, including Subpart J which regulates the use of
dispersants and other chemicals as a tool in oil spill response.
EPA also works with state and local partners to help protect the public and the
environment from catastrophic releases of hazardous substances at chemical handling
facilities through the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness program. Under the
Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA regulations require that facilities handling more than a
threshold quantity of certain extremely hazardous substances must implement a risk
management program and submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP) to EPA among
others entities. Facilities are required to update their RMP at least once every five years
and sooner if changes are made at the facility. EPA currently conducts over 550
inspections or unannounced exercises per year (approximately 5 percent of the
universe of 13,100 RMP facilities in non-delegated states), including over 140 at high
risk facilities. In FY 2012, through the Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in
Critical Areas investment, the Agency will expand its current activities.
Homeland Security:
EPA's Homeland Security work is an important component of the Agency's prevention,
protection, and response activities. EPA will continue to provide Homeland Security
6 Refer to Grant Guidelines to States for Implementing the Delivery Prohibition Provision of the Energy Policy Act of
2005, August 2006, EPA-510-R-06-003, http://vwvw.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact Q5.htm#Final.
50
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
emergency preparedness and response capability. In FY 2012, the Agency requests
$38.7 million to: maintain its capability to respond effectively to incidents that may
involve harmful chemical, biological, and radiological substances; operate the
Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN); maximize the effectiveness of its
involvement in national security events through pre-deployments of assets such as
emergency response personnel and field detection equipment; maintain the Emergency
Management Portal (EMP); and manage, collect, and validate new information for new
and existing weapons of mass destruction agents as decontamination techniques are
developed or as other information emerges from the scientific community.
Improve Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country
In FY 2012, EPA will assist Federally-recognized tribes in assessing environmental
conditions in Indian country, and will help build their capacity to implement
environmental programs though the $8.5 million investment in funding for the Tribal
GAP program. EPA will also strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting
environmental policies and decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, and
environmental stewardship in Indian country through continued collaboration with
Agency program offices as well as through EPA's Tribal Science Council.
Since adopting the EPA Indian Policy in 1984, EPA has worked with federally-
recognized tribes on a government-to-government basis, in recognition of the federal
government's trust responsibility to federally-recognized tribes. Under federal
environmental statutes, the Agency is responsible for protecting human health and the
environment in Indian country. In FY 2012, EPA's Office of International and Tribal
Affairs (OITA) will continue to lead an Agency-wide effort to work with tribes, Alaska
Native Villages, and inter-tribal consortia to fulfill this responsibility. EPA's strategy for
achieving this objective has three major components:
• Establish an Environmental Presence in Indian Country: The Agency will
continue to provide funding through the Indian General Assistance Program (GAP)
so each federally-recognized tribe can establish an environmental presence.
» Provide Access to Environmental Information: EPA will provide the information
tribes need to meet EPA and Tribal environmental priorities, as well as characterize
the environmental and public health improvements that result from joint actions.
• Implementation of Environmental Goals: The Agency will provide opportunities
for the implementation of Tribal environmental programs by tribes, or directly by
EPA, as necessary through 1) media-specific programs, 2) tribes themselves, or
3) directly by EPA if necessary.
Additionally, in FY 2012, EPA is investing in the multi-media Tribal implementation grant
program which allows the Agency to build upon the successful capacity-building work of
the GAP program through full program implementation.
51
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Research
In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing
an integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of
individually. EPA is realigning and integrating the work of its base research programs
into four new research programs (further described in the Goal 1 overview and
appendix) The new Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program
will focus on the integration, translation and coordinated communication of research on
sustainability, land use, protection and restoration, human health, ecological risk
assessment modeling, and ecosystem services. The SHC research program will
provide innovative and creative management approaches and decision support tools for
communities, regions, states and tribes to protect and ensure a sustainable balance
between human health and the environment.
Communities are increasingly challenged to improve and protect the health and well-
being of their residents and the ecosystem services upon which they depend, in the
face of increasing resource demands and changing demographics, economic, social,
and climate patterns. Research will be conducted in broad areas, which will support the
many aspects of community health described above:
I. Research to Address Specific Community Needs and Improve Our Understanding
of Community Sustainabilitv:
As specific research questions are formulated in the areas of human health,
ecosystems and ecosystem services, land and waste management, innovative
technologies and life cycle analysis, EPA will begin conducting pilot projects that
explore and address problems in an integrated manner by focusing specifically on
1) an urban community, 2)multiple communities in the Gulf of Mexico region,
and3) certain high-priority problems facing communities across the nation.
II. Decision Analysis and Support for Conducting Integrated Assessments:
While communities often have creative and well-trained government staff, NGOs,
and citizen groups, they usually cfo not have the capacity to rapidly develop and/or
customize advanced decision tools and supporting data sets that will enable
effective, real-time community investment decisions. This research will focus on
developing practical decision support tools and analytic methods that enable
communities to effectively use information developed by the SHC research
program and other programs to support community decision making related to
environmental sustainability.
III. Superfund:
The SHC research program will focus on innovative remediation options for
contaminated sediments and the development of new alternatives to dredging. In
addition, the program will develop solutions to contaminated ground water by
evaluating subsurface and above-ground alternatives to pump-and-treat,
particularly for recalcitrant contaminants such as chlorinated solvents and other
contaminants that do not dissolve easily in water, and will evaluate chemical
52
-------
Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
oxidation and permeable reactive barriers, including those using nanoscale
materials. The SHC research program will continue to provide technical support
and technology transfer to support ground water modeling needs in communities.
IV. Oil Spill Research:
In FY 2012, the SHC program will focus on two areas related to oil spill research:
1) EPA will develop protocols to revise or test oil spill control agents or products
for listing on the National Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule and other
activities deemed necessary by EPA's Office of Emergency Management (OEM),
and 2) the Agency will conduct studies on the effectiveness of bioremediation for
freshly spilled oil and aged residuals of petroleum-based oil, biodiesel, and
biodiesel blends, and the performance of dispersants for deep water applications.
EPA also conducts research supporting Goal 3 through its Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program, which leverages innovative and cutting-edge research from scientists
in academia through a competitive and peer-reviewed grant process that is integrated
with EPA's overall research efforts. The Agency is enhancing its investment in areas
critical to support the Administration's science priorities, including strengthening the
future scientific workforce through investment in fellowships to students in pursuit of
careers and advanced degrees in environmental science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics. In FY 2012, EPA will provide $14 million for STAR Fellowships, including
support for an estimated 243 continuing fellows and 105 new STAR fellows.
53
-------
54
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing
Pollution
Strategic Goal: Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals and prevent
pollution at the source.
Resource Summary
($ in 000)
7.8% of Budget
1 - Ensure Chemical Safety
2 - Promote Pollution Prevention
Goal 4 Total
Difference
FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY 2010 EN
Enacted Annualized President's to FY 2012
Budget CR Budget PresBud
$618,182
$62,945
$681,127
$618,182
$62,945
$681,127
$642,722
$59,821
$702,542
$24,539
($3,124)
$21,416
Workyears
2,693
2,693
2,706
14
NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding.
FY2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
Introduction
Chemicals have become ubiquitous in our everyday lives and products, because they
are used in the production of everything from our homes and cars to the cell phones we
carry and the food we eat. Chemicals are often released into the environment as a
result of their manufacture, processing, use, and disposal. Research shows that
children are getting steady infusions of industrial chemicals before they even are given
solid food1'2' Other vulnerable groups, including low-income, minority, and indigenous
populations, may also be disproportionately impacted by and thus particularly at risk
from chemical exposure4'5'6. While TSCA authorizes review of new chemicals before
1 The Disproportionate Impact of Environmental Health Threats on Children of Color
(http://vosemite.epa.qov/opa/admpress.nsf/8d49f7ad4bbcf4ef852573590040b7f6/79a3f13c301688828525770c0063b
277!OpenDocument)
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
3 Guide to Considering Children's Health When Developing EPA Actions: Implementing Executive Order 13045 and
EPA's Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children
(http://yosemite.epa.qov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/ADPquide.htm/$File/EPA ADP Guide 508.pdf)
Holistic Risk-based Environmental Decision Making: a Native Perspective
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.qov/pmc/articles/PMC1241171)
55
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
they enter the market and provides authority for EPA to mandate industry to conduct
testing, there remain gaps in the available use and exposure data and state of
knowledge on many widely used chemicals in commerce. EPA programs work to
ensure chemical safety, including pesticides, and to manage the chemicals already in
the environment that may have adverse affects. EPA is also promoting sustainable,
lower risk processes and working with communities to improve overall environmental
quality.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to make substantial progress in transitioning from an
approach dominated by voluntary data submissions by industry, to a more aggressive
action-oriented approach to ensure chemical safety through four areas of focus: 1)
using all available authorities under TSCA to take immediate and lasting action to
eliminate or reduce identified chemical risks and develop proven safer alternatives; 2)
using regulatory mechanisms to fill remaining gaps in critical exposure data, and
increasing transparency and public access to information on TSCA chemicals; 3) 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 4) prevent introduction of unsafe new chemicals into
commerce.
EPA's Pesticide Licensing program screens new pesticides before they reach the
market and ensures that pesticides already in commerce are safe when used in
accordance with the label. As directed by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), EPA is responsible for registering pesticides to
protect consumers, pesticide users, workers who may be exposed to pesticides,
children, and other sensitive populations. EPA also reviews potential impacts on the
environment, with particular attention to endangered species.
In 1990, the Pollution Prevention Act established preventing pollution before it is
generated as national environmental policy. EPA is enhancing cross-cutting efforts to
advance sustainable practices, safer chemicals and sustainable lower risk processes
and practices, and safer products. The combined effect of community level actions,
geographically targeted investments, attention to chemicals, and concern for
ecosystems, implemented through the lens of science, transparency and law, will bring
real improvements and protections.
Achieving an environmentally sustainable future demands that EPA make smarter,
faster decisions guided by sound science on environmental problems facing the country
today. It is also crucial to anticipate tomorrow's problems and identify approaches to
better inform environmentally sustainable behavior. The EPA Science Advisory Board
5 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income
Populations
6 Interim Guidance on Considering Environmental Justice During the Development of an Action
(http://www.epa.qov/compliance/ei/resources/policv/considerinq-ei-in-rulemakinq-quide-07-2010.pdf)
56
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
has recognized7 that the improved understanding of today's environmental problems
requires an integrative, transdisciplinary approach that considers multi-media,
integrated, and non-traditional approaches to achieve more effective and efficient
solutions. EPA's research request reflects the necessity to increase synergies among
programs using systems thinking and catalytic innovation in order to meet the problems
of the 21st century.
Major FY 2012 Investment Areas
Enhancing Chemical Safety
EPA will invest an additional $16 million and 5.5 FTE to continue implementing its
enhanced chemical management strategy to make long-overdue progress in ensuring
the safety of existing chemicals: 1) obtaining, managing and making public chemical
information; 2) screening and assessing chemical risks; and 3) managing chemical
risks. In FY 2012, EPA's approach will be centered on immediate and lasting actions to
identify and mitigate unreasonable chemical risks and develop proven safer alternatives
to hazardous chemicals.
The FY 2012 investment will provide for action needed to 1) increase the Agency's pace
in obtaining and making public TSCA chemical health and safety and other information;
2) conduct detailed chemical risk assessments on priority chemicals and accelerating
progress in characterizing the hazards posed by HPV chemicals 3) undertake
appropriate risk management actions on chemicals identified as posing significant
human health or environmental risks.
Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions
• Funding reductions reflect expected program efficiencies and reprioritization of
targeted activities. Specifically, EPA will reduce support for non-regulatory activities
including pollinator protection, urban pest management and the Pesticide
Environmental Stewardship Program. Funding reductions may also delay
development and implementation of some risk assessment policies.
FY 2012 Activities
Toxics Programs
FY 2012 represents a crucial stage in EPA's approach for ensuring chemical safety.
The program has attained its 'zero tolerance' goal in preventing introduction of unsafe
new chemicals into commerce but many existing ('pre-TSCA') chemicals already in
commerce remain un-assessed. The Existing Chemicals can be split into three major
component activities: 1) strengthening chemical information collection, management,
7http://vosemite.epa.qov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/E989ECFC125966428525775B0047BE1A/$File/EPA-SAB-10-010-
unsiqned.pdf
57
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
and transparency ($14.7M); 2) Screening and Assessing Chemical Risks ($15.6M); and
3) Reducing Chemical Risks ($26.4M).
Also in FY 2012, EPA will continue to prevent the entry of new chemicals into the US
market which pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. The major
activity of the New Chemicals program ($14.3M) is PMN review and management,
which addresses the potential risks from approximately 1,100 chemicals, products of
biotechnology and new chemical nanoscale materials received annually prior to their
entry into the US marketplace.
In FY 2012, the Agency will continue to implement the Chemicals Risk Management
program to further eliminate risks from high-risk "legacy" chemicals, such as
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury. The Lead program will continue efforts
to further reduce childhood blood lead incidence, and will continue implementing the
Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule though increased outreach efforts
and targeted activities to support renovator certifications. EPA will allocate $35.3 million
to undertaking existing chemical risk management actions in FY 2012.
Children's Risk
Blood Lead Levels for Children aged 1-5
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
OX
>10 ug/dL
Elevated Lead
Levels
>5 ug/dL
New Concern Lead
Levels
>5 Ug/dL
TARGET Lead Levels
For near Future
rCT
Pesticides Programs
A key component of chemical safety and to protecting the health of people,
communities, and ecosystems, is identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks
presented by the pesticides on which our society and economy depend. EPA will
continue to manage a comprehensive pesticide risk reduction program through science-
based registration and reevaluation processes, a worker safety program, and support
for integrated pest management. The pesticide review processes will continue to
increasingly focus on improving pesticide registrations compliance with the Endangered
Species Act and achieve broader Agency objectives for water quality protection.
58
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
EPA will continue to place emphasis on the protection of potentially sensitive groups,
such as children, by reducing exposures from pesticides used in and around homes,
schools, and other public areas. In addition, the Agency worker protection, certification,
and training regulations will encourage safe application practices. Together, these
programs minimize exposure to pesticides, maintain a safe and affordable food supply,
address public health issues, and minimize property damage that can occur from
insects and pests. As part of the Agency's review of non-regulatory efforts, the
Strategic Agriculture Initiative program will shift its emphasis to the Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) program, providing a more focused effort in IPM to address a wide
range of agricultural risk issues in food safety as well as minimizing exposure from
pesticide drift.
Chemical and biological pesticides help meet national and global demands for food.
They provide effective pest control for homes, schools, gardens, highways, utility lines,
hospitals, and drinking water treatment facilities and control animal vectors of disease.
Many regulatory actions involve reduced risk pesticides which, once registered, will
result in increased societal benefits. In addition to collecting a total of $82 million in
anticipated fee-funded activities in FY 2012, $32 million which can be obligated EPA is
funding $128.7 million in Pesticides Licensing programs.
Pollution Prevention
EPA will continue to promote innovation through environmental stewardship strategies
that promote economic revitalization. EPA will draw on innovative and cross media
strategies to focus analysis and coordination across the Agency, with States, and with
other Federal agencies.
In FY 2012, EPA's Pollution Prevention (P2) programs will target technical assistance,
information and supporting assessments to encourage the use of greener chemicals,
technologies, processes, and products through programs with proven records of
success such as: Green Suppliers Network, Regional Grants, Pollution Prevention
Resource Exchange, Partnership for Sustainable Healthcare, Green Chemistry and
Green Engineering. In addition, EPA's P2 programs will continue to support the new
Economy, Energy and Environment (E3) partnership among federal agencies, local
governments and manufacturers to promote energy efficiency, job creation and
environmental improvement.
Through these efforts, EPA will encourage government and business to adopt source
reduction practices that can help to prevent pollution and avoid potential adverse health
and environmental impacts. P2 grants to states and tribes provide support for technical
assistance, education, and outreach to assist businesses. Work under these programs
also supports the energy reduction goals under E.G. 13514. In FY 2012, the total
funding for P2 programs is $20.7 million and 72.7 FTE.
59
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
International Affairs
Environmental pollution and contamination often extend well beyond a country's
individual borders. In the face of shared environmental challenges, such as global
climate change and improving children's environmental health outcomes, cooperation
with global partners can catalyze even greater progress toward protecting our domestic
environment. By partnering with and assisting other nations to improve their
environmental governance, EPA also helps protect the U.S. from pollution originating
outside our borders from reaching our citizens. These collaborative efforts are the key
to sustaining and enhancing progress, both domestically and internationally.
EPA's international priorities include: building strong environmental institutions and
legal structures; improving access to clean water; improving urban air quality; limiting
global GHG emissions and other climate-forcing pollutants, reducing exposure to toxic
chemicals, and reducing hazardous waste and improve waste management.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires Federal agencies to prepare
environmental impact statements (EISs) for actions that have the potential to cause
significant environmental effects, and develop appropriate plans to mitigate or eliminate
those impacts. EPA's unique role in this process is reviewing and commenting on all
Federal EISs and making the comments available to the public. In FY 2012, EPA will
continue to work with other Federal agencies to streamline and to improve their NEPA
processes. Work also will focus on a number of key areas such as review and
comment on mining on-shore and off-shore liquid natural gas facilities, coal bed
methane development and other energy-related projects, nuclear power/hydro-power
plant licensing/re-licensing, highway and airport expansion, military base
realignment/redevelopment (including the expansion in Guam), flood control and port
development, and management of national forests and public lands. EPA also will
conduct work pursuant to the Appalachian Coal Mining Interagency Action Plan.
Research
In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing
an integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of
individually. This approach will create synergy and yield benefits beyond those possible
from approaches that are more narrowly targeted to single chemicals or problem areas.
EPA is realigning and integrating the work of its base research programs into four new
research programs (further described in the Goal 1 overview and appendix).
The new Chemical Safety and Sustainability (CSS) Program will develop enhanced
chemical screening and testing approaches for improving context-relevant chemical
assessment and management. New computational, physico-chemical, and biological
and exposure science tools promise to transform the way risks of chemical products are
evaluated. Development and validation will proceed on broadly applicable, predictive,
60
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
high-throughput tools to be combined with existing test methods, integrating toxicity and
exposure pathways in the context of the life cycle of the chemical. In FY 2012, EPA will
begin a multi-year transition from the Endocrine Disrupter Screening Program (EDSP)
to validate and more efficiently use computational toxicology methods and high
throughput screens that will allow the Agency to more quickly and cost-effectively
assess potential chemical toxicity. As reflected in Figure V, testing 300 chemicals with
computational toxicology methods costs on average about $20,000 per chemical
compared to more traditional approaches that can cost more than $6 million per
chemical. In FY 2012 EPA will begin to evaluate endocrine-relevant ToxCast assays.
TRANSFORMING the EFFECTIVENESS
of Chemical Safety Research
. . .
•
•
: ....
"
.-.-ii - .,•:: ,'.: "-: ±
__^, - •
.'•-, t: '*:—*"•
-.,!•• -• 1C- --.:*'. I'flih
w —: "'SlIS*^--1*1
^
I lilil
-
-
j .
•• '
.
COMPTOX:
Increases results
Decreases costs
Figure V: EPA research
is developing
computational toxicology
tools that are faster,
more efficient, and have
the capacity to test
thousands of chemicals
at a fraction of the cost
for traditional animal-
based testing (e.g., $2
billion versus $6 million
for 300 chemicals). This
innovative research is
critical to catalyzing
sustainable solutions
that inform decisions on
chemical safety.
CSS will also contribute to the Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research
Program by providing decision makers in individual localities and communities with
research and support on contaminants of highest priority and concern to them. Better
and more integrated approaches to chemical testing and assessment also will lead to
better air toxics and drinking water-related regional and local decision making. Under
this newly consolidated research program, EPA will continue to support the scientific
foundation for addressing the risks of exposure to chemicals in humans and wildlife.
Resources requested total $95.7 million and 292.7 FTE.
In FY2012, the Agency's Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) program will
continue to develop assessments including Integrated Science Assessments (ISA) of
criteria air pollutants, Integrated Risk Information Systems (IRIS) Assessments of high
priority chemicals, and Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTV). The
program will release draft ISAs for ozone and lead for Clean Air Science Advisory
61
-------
Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution
Committee review and public comment. The program will strive to post numerous
completed human health assessments (e.g. dioxin, methanol, cumulative phthalate
assessment, benzo-a-pyrene, Libby asbestos cancer assessment, and PCB noncancer
assessment) in IRIS.
EPA also conducts research supporting Goal 4 through its Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program, which leverages innovative and cutting-edge research from scientists
in academia through a competitive and peer-reviewed grant process that is integrated
with EPA's overall research efforts. The Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP)
will continue to enhance the nation's preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities
for homeland security incidents and other hazards.
62
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Strategic Goa/: Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and
targeted civil and criminal enforcement. Assure compliance with environmental laws.
Resource Summary
($ in 000)
1
9.2% of Budget
- Enforce Environmental Laws
Goal 5 Total
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$807,903
$807,903
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$807,903
$807,903
FY2012
President's
Budget
$829,831
$829,831
Difference
FY 2010 EN
to FY 201 2
PresBud
$21,929
$21,929
Workyears
4,003
4,003
3,914
(89)
NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding.
FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
Introduction
EPA's civil and criminal enforcement programs perform the core function of assuring
compliance with our nation's environmental laws. A strong and effective enforcement
program is essential to maintain respect for the rule of law and to realize the promise of
our federal statutes to protect our environment and the public health of our citizens.
On January 18, 2011, President Obama issued a "Presidential Memoranda -
Regulatory Compliance" which reaffirms the importance of effective enforcement and
compliance in regulations. In part, it states "Sound regulatory enforcement promotes
the welfare of Americans in many ways, by increasing public safety, improving working
conditions, and protecting the air we breathe and the water we drink. Consistent
regulatory enforcement also levels the playing field among regulated entities, ensuring
that those that fail to comply with the law do not have an unfair advantage over their
law-abiding competitors."
In FY 2012, EPA will maintain the strength of its core enforcement program and begin a
new focus on harnessing the tools of 21st century technology to make our enforcement
program more efficient and more effective for the future. We will also continue to
address special challenges such as the litigation resulting from the BP Deepwater
Horizon oil spill.
63
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Our current approach, rooted largely in the traditional inspection and enforcement
model, has produced substantial public health and environmental benefits. However,
use of modern technology and methods can reduce the costs of monitoring and
ensuring compliance both to EPA and businesses, and enable us to do a more effective
job. Today, we rely almost exclusively on time-consuming and expensive pollution tests
that make it hard to quickly find and investigate the worst air, waste and water pollution,
and for communities to know about pollution that affects them. It is increasingly difficult
to ensure compliance using outdated tools and old approaches, as the universe of
regulated pollution sources is outstripping the resources available to state and federal
inspectors to find and correct non-compliance.
EPA and its state partners simply cannot conduct enough inspections to ensure that the
health and environmental benefits of laws passed by Congress are realized and
catastrophes are avoided. The BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the Enbridge
pipeline oil spill in Marshall, Michigan have generated a greater awareness of the
growing need for the country to catch up when it comes to finding and correcting non-
compliance to prevent damage and economic hardships. Yet the oil spill crises are just
one piece of the puzzle. Today, states are adding more waters to the Clean Water Act's
list of impaired waters, while at the same time indicating that resource constraints are
pushing them to seriously consider returning control of environmental protection
programs to EPA. These and other issues argue for new approaches to ensuring
compliance to enable the Agency to become more effective and efficient.
A recent snapshot (see graph on following page) shows us that nationally reported
compliance data - while it does not paint a complete picture - strongly indicates that
violations are likely widespread. For example, non-compliance with the Clean Water
Act's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits in many places averages
60 percent - leading to concerns about health impacts in those places.
64
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Non-Compliance Information Across Sectors1
Resource
Conservation
.mil Recovery
Act (RCRAt
^Statistically
Valid
**Air Toxics
**New Source
Review
(RSR)/Prevention of
Significant
Deterioration (PSD)
;*Miningand
Mineral
Processing
•RCRA
'CWA
A= Combined Sewer Municipalities H=Oil&Gas 0= Riosphonc Acid
B= Ethylene Oxide Manufacturers 1= Misc. Metal Parts P= Mines
C= Organic Chemical Manufacturing J= Fabnc Coating Q= Other Mineral Processing
D=Leak Detection and Rep air (LDAR) K= Acid Manufacturing R= RCRA Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities
EF= Flares L= Cement Manufacturing S= Financial Assurance
F= LDAR Miscellaneous M= Glass Manufacturing T= Majors
G= Petroleum Refining N= Coal Fired Boilers U= Minors
*Non-compliance rates based on data gathered during inspections/evaluations at a statistically valid sample of the
regulated universe and defined as having a minimum of one violation with any given requirement examined during
the inspection/evaluation.
"""Non-compliance rates are based on violations detected at facilities in these sectors during inspections and
evaluations; not statistically valid sample, but based on completed evaluations for 61% of the Air Toxic targeted
universe (LDAR, Flares, LDAR Misc., Petroleum Refining, Oil and Gas, Misc. Metal Parts and Fabric coating), 40% of
the targeted universe for NSR/PSD (Acid Manufacturing, Cement Manufacturing, Glass Manufacturing), and 14% of
the targeted universe for Mining and Mineral Processing (Phosphoric Acid, Other Mineral Processing, Mines).
***Non-compliance rates are based on a combination of facility self-reported Discharge Monitoring Reports. (DMRs)
and violations detected at facilities during inspections.
65
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
Major FY 2012 Investment Areas
In FY 2012, the Agency's Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas
investment will allow EPA to begin to move toward implementing a more efficient and
effective enforcement program that uses 21st century e-reporting and monitoring tools,
in combination with market-based approaches. Investments in new technology offer the
opportunity to save the federal government, states, and American business valuable
resources as overall compliance costs are reduced. EPA will also invest in more
advanced monitoring tools, allowing EPA and its state partners to more easily identify,
investigate and address the worst violations that affect our communities. The Agency
requests $14.2 million and 4.0 FTE under Goal 5 for this investment.
EPA will begin to review compliance reporting requirements in existing rules to identify
opportunities for conversion to a national electronic reporting format; and examine new
rules to incorporate electronic reporting elements during rule development. Eliminating
existing paper based reporting systems will be an overarching goal of this initiative. As
part of the process of developing new rules, EPA will identify opportunities to require
objective, self-monitoring and/or self-certification. EPA will upgrade key data systems to
allow for third-party certification, public accountability, advanced monitoring and
electronic reporting requirements to improve compliance.
EPA will begin enhancing its data systems to help the Agency and its regulatory
partners better determine the compliance status of facilities, focus our resources to
efficiently address the most serious non-compliance, and substantially reduce the costs
of collecting, sharing, and analyzing compliance information.
With this investment, EPA will use a market based approach to develop open platform
"e-file" data exchange standards, modeled after that used by the IRS to collect tax data,
which would unleash the expertise of the private sector marketplace to replace the
largely paper-based reporting systems that have evolved over the past thirty years.
Further, in those programs where EPA has already built electronic reporting tools, the
private sector may enhance these tools to better support industry needs, enabling EPA
to largely eliminate the need to continue to fund the operation and maintenance of these
tools.
With the requested resources, EPA also will begin to invest in modern monitoring
technology such as portable emission detectors, thermal imaging cameras, flow meters,
and remote (fenceline) monitoring equipment to increase the effectiveness and
efficiency of our compliance monitoring program. Our investment includes an increase
for monitoring equipment, as well as funding to train staff on the use of remote sensing
techniques. Providing modern monitoring technology for EPA inspectors will enable
field staff to perform more efficient and effective compliance verification. Modern
monitoring equipment will increase EPA's ability to detect violations across all programs
and focus our efforts on the most significant problems.
66
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
EPA's response to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue in FY 2012 as the
Agency provides support for the U.S. Department of Justice's civil action and criminal
investigations against BP, Anadarko, Transocean, and other responsible parties. The
Department of Justice filed its civil complaint on behalf of EPA, the Coast Guard, and
other federal plaintiffs in December 2010, and EPA will be actively providing litigation
support, discovery management, and response to court orders throughout FY 2012.
Currently, EPA resources are being used to support Department of Justice's on-going
civil investigations.
Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions
• Eliminating funding for homeland security enforcement efforts because EPA will not
need to maintain separate capacity to support environmental criminal investigations
and training for terrorism-related investigations. This reduction reflects the increased
capacity of other agencies to handle the environmental forensics work associated
with security incidents.
• Reducing funding for Enforcement Training, relying more on web-based tools to
more efficiently deliver compliance assistance and training, reducing staff intensive
activities.
• Reducing funding for Superfund Enforcement that could have been used for PRP
searches and settlement activity.
• Reducing funding to the Department of Justice for CERCLA case support.
• Reducing funding for Criminal Enforcement that could have been used for
investigative support for criminal cases.
Priority Goal
EPA has established a Priority Goal to focus and highlight progress made through
enforcement actions to clean up the nation's polluted waters. The Priority Goal is:
Clean water is essential for our quality of life and the health of our communities.
EPA will take actions over the next two years to improve water quality.
Improve Water Quality: Federal Clean Water Enforcement
• Increase pollutant reducing enforcement actions in waters that don't meet water
quality standards, and post results and analysis on the web.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to track progress towards its Priority Goals and will
update goals as necessary and appropriate.
67
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
FY 2012 Activities
While making the reforms described above to improve our core business practices for
monitoring and reporting, the Agency remains committed to implementing a strong
enforcement and compliance program focused on identifying and reducing non-
compliance problems and deterring future violations. In order to meet these goals, the
program employs an integrated, common-sense approach to problem-solving and
decision-making. An appropriate mix of data collection and analysis, compliance
monitoring, assistance and incentives, civil and criminal enforcement efforts and
innovative problem-solving approaches addresses significant environmental issues and
achieve environmentally beneficial outcomes. As discussed above, enhancing these
efforts through a new approach that relies on 21st century reporting and monitoring tools
will be the focus of our efforts in FY 2012 and will be used to advance implementation of
the Administrator's priorities as well as our core program work. Including the new FY
2012 investment, $375.7 million and 2,132.7 FTE will support compliance monitoring
and civil and criminal enforcement activities.
Focus Areas:
• Protecting Air Quality: EPA will focus on the largest sources of air pollution,
including coal-fired power plants and the cement, acid and glass sectors, to improve
air quality. Enforcement to cut toxic air pollution in communities improves the health
of communities, particularly those overburdened by pollution.
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 requires increased use
of renewable fuels. EPA's Civil Enforcement program will help the regulated
community understand their statutory obligations under the EISA; inspect renewable
fuel production facilities; monitor compliance with renewable fuel requirements;
monitor and enforce the credit trading program; and, undertake administrative and
judicial enforcement actions, as appropriate.
• Protecting America's Waters: EPA, working with permitting authorities, is revamping
compliance and enforcement approaches to make progress on the most important
water pollution problems. This work includes getting raw sewage out of water,
cutting pollution from animal waste and reducing pollution from stormwater runoff.
These efforts will help to clean up great waters like the Chesapeake Bay and will
focus on revitalizing urban communities by protecting and restoring urban waters.
Enforcement will also support the goal of assuring clean drinking water for all
communities, including small systems and in Indian country.
• Cleaning Up Our Communities: EPA protects communities by ensuring that
responsible parties conduct cleanups, saving federal dollars for sites where there
are no viable contributing parties. Ensuring that these parties clean up the sites
ultimately reduces direct human exposure to hazardous pollutants and
contaminants, provides for long-term human health protection, and ultimately makes
contaminated properties available for reuse.
68
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action
enforcement program supports the goal set by the Agency and its state partners of
attaining remedy construction at 95 percent of 3,747 RCRA facilities by the year
2020. In 2010, EPA issued the "National Enforcement Strategy for Corrective
Action" to promote and communicate nationally consistent enforcement and
compliance assurance principles, practices, and tools to help achieve this goal. In
FY 2012, EPA will continue targeted enforcement under the Strategy and will work
with its state partners to assess the contribution of enforcement in achieving the
2020 goal.
• Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution: Strengthening chemical
safety enforcement and reducing exposure to pesticides will improve the health of
Americans. Enforcement reduces direct human exposures to toxic chemicals and
pesticides and supports long-term human health protection.
Compliance Monitoring
EPA's Compliance Monitoring program reviews and evaluates the activities of the
regulated community to determine compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit
conditions and settlement agreements, as well as to determine whether conditions
presenting imminent and substantial endangerment exist. In FY 2012, EPA's
compliance monitoring activities will be both environmental media- and sector-based.
EPA's media-based inspections complement those performed by states and tribes, and
are a key part of our strategy for meeting the long-term and annual goals established for
the air, water, pesticides, toxic substances and hazardous waste programs.
Compliance monitoring includes EPA's management and use of data systems to run its
compliance and enforcement programs under the various statutes and programs that
EPA enforces. In FY 2012, the Agency will begin the process of enhancing its data
systems to support electronic reporting, providing more comprehensive, accessible data
to the public and improving integration of environmental information with health data
and other pertinent data sources from other federal agencies and private entities. The
Agency will continue its multi-year project to modernize its national enforcement and
compliance data system, the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), which
supports both compliance monitoring and civil enforcement.
Civil Enforcement
The Civil Enforcement program's overarching goal is to assure compliance with the
nation's environmental laws and regulations in order to protect human health and the
environment. The program collaborates with the Department of Justice, states, local
agencies and Tribal governments to ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all
environmental laws and regulations. The program seeks to protect public health and
the environment and ensure a level playing field by strengthening our partnership with
our co-implementers in the states, encouraging regulated entities to rapidly correct their
69
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
own violations, ensuring that violators do not realize an economic benefit from
noncompliance and pursuing enforcement to deter future violations.
The Civil Enforcement program develops, litigates and settles administrative and civil
judicial cases against serious violators of environmental laws. In FY 2010, EPA
achieved commitments to invest more than $12 billion in future pollution controls and
pollution reduction commitments totaling approximately 1.5 billion pounds.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to target implementation of the National Compliance and
Enforcement Initiatives established for FY 2011-2013. These national initiatives
address problems that remain complex and challenging, including Clean Water Act "wet
weather" discharges, violations of the Clean Air Act New Source Review/Prevention of
Significant Deterioration requirements and Air Toxics regulations, RCRA violations at
mineral processing facilities, and multi-media problems resulting from energy extraction
activities. Information on initiatives, regulatory requirements, enforcement alerts and
EPA results will be made available to the public and the regulated community through
web-based sites. The Civil Enforcement program also will support the Environmental
Justice program and the Administrator's priority to address pollution impacting
vulnerable populations. The Civil Enforcement program will focus actions on facilities
that have repeatedly violated environmental laws in communities that may be
disproportionately exposed to risks and harms from the environment, including minority
and/or low-income areas. In addition, the Civil Enforcement program will help to
implement the President's directive to develop and implement a compliance and
enforcement strategy for the Chesapeake Bay, providing strong oversight to ensure
existing regulations are complied with consistently and in a timely manner.
Criminal Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement underlies our commitment to pursuing the most serious pollution
violations. EPA's Criminal Enforcement program investigates and helps prosecute
environmental violations that seriously threaten public health and the environment and
involve intentional, deliberate or criminal behavior on the part of the violator. The
Criminal Enforcement program deters violations of environmental laws and regulations
by demonstrating that the regulated community will be held accountable, through jail
sentences and criminal fines. Bringing criminal cases sends a strong deterrence
message to potential violators, enhances aggregate compliance with laws and
regulations and protects our communities.
The program has completed its three-year hiring strategy, raising the number of special
agents to 200, and will use this capacity to address complex environmental cases in FY
2012. In FY 2012, the Criminal Enforcement program will expand its identification and
investigation of cases with significant environmental, human health and deterrence
impact while balancing its overall case load across all pollution statutes. EPA's Criminal
Enforcement program will focus on cases across all media that involve serious harm or
70
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
injury; hazardous or toxic releases; ongoing, repetitive, or multiple releases; serious
documented exposure to pollutants; and violators with significant repeat or chronic
noncompliance or prior criminal conviction.
Superfund Enforcement
EPA's Superfund Enforcement program protects communities by ensuring that
responsible parties conduct cleanups, preserving Federal dollars for sites where there
are no viable contributing parties. Superfund Enforcement ensures prompt site cleanup
and uses an "enforcement first" approach that maximizes the participation of liable and
viable parties in performing and paying for cleanups in both the remedial and removal
programs. The Superfund Enforcement program includes nationally significant or
precedential civil, judicial and administrative site remediation cases. The program also
provides legal and technical enforcement support on Superfund Enforcement actions
and emerging issues. The Superfund Enforcement program also develops waste
cleanup enforcement policies and provides guidance and tools that clarify potential
environmental cleanup liability, with specific attention to the reuse and revitalization of
contaminated properties, including Brownfields properties.
Enforcement authorities play a unique role under the Superfund program. The
authorities are used to ensure that responsible parties conduct a majority of the cleanup
actions and reimburse the federal government for cleanups financed by Federal
resources. In tandem with this approach, various reforms have been implemented to
increase fairness, reduce transaction costs, promote economic development and make
sites available for appropriate reuse.2 Ensuring that these parties clean up sites
ultimately reduces direct human exposures to hazardous pollutants and contaminants,
provides for long-term human health protections and makes contaminated properties
available for reuse.
The Department of Justice supports EPA's Superfund Enforcement program through
negotiations and judicial actions to compel Potentially Responsible Parties (PRP)
cleanup and litigation to recover Trust Fund monies. In FY 2010, the Superfund
Enforcement program secured private party commitments that exceeded $1.6 billion.
Of this amount, PRPs have committed to future response work with an estimated value
of approximately $1.4 billion; PRPs have agreed to reimburse the Agency for $150
million in past costs; and PRPs have been billed by the EPA for approximately $82
million in oversight costs. EPA also works to ensure that required legally enforceable
institutional controls and financial assurance instruments are in place and adhered to at
Superfund sites and at facilities subject to RCRA Corrective Action to ensure the long-
term protectiveness of cleanup actions.
In FY 2012, the Agency will negotiate remedial design/remedial action cleanup
agreements and removal agreements at contaminated properties to address
contamination impacting local communities. When appropriated dollars are used to
2 For more information regarding EPA's enforcement program and its various components, please refer to
http://vwvw.epa.qov/compliance/cleanup/superfund/.
71
-------
Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws
clean up sites, the program will recover the associated cleanup costs from the
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs). If future work remains at a site, recovered
funds could be placed in a site-specific special account pursuant to the agreement.
Special accounts are sub-accounts within EPA's Superfund Trust Fund. The Agency
will continue its efforts to establish special accounts and to use and track those funds
efficiently to facilitate and advance cleanups. As of the end of FY 2010, 1,023 site-
specific special accounts were established and over $3.7 billion were deposited into
special accounts (including earned interest). EPA has obligated and dispersed
approximately $1.85 billion from special accounts to finance site response actions and
has developed multi-year plans to use the remaining funds as expeditiously as possible.
These funds will be used to conduct many different CERCLA response actions,
including, but not limited to, investigations to determine the extent of contamination and
appropriate remedy required, construction of the remedy, enforcement activities, and
post-construction monitoring.
During FY 2012, the Agency will continue to refine the cost documentation process to
gain further efficiencies; provide DOJ case support for Superfund sites; and calculate
indirect cost and annual allocation rates to be applied to direct costs incurred by EPA for
site cleanup. The Agency also will continue to maintain the accounting and billing of
Superfund oversight costs attributable to responsible parties as stipulated in the terms
of settlement agreements.
Partnering with States, Tribes and Communities
EPA shares accountability for environmental and human health protection with states
and tribes. Most states have been delegated the legal responsibility for implementing
environmental programs. We work together to target the most important pollution
violations and ensure that companies that meet their obligations and are responsible
neighbors are not put at a competitive disadvantage. EPA also has a responsibility to
oversee state and Tribal implementation of federal laws to ensure that the same level of
protection for the environment and the public applies across the country.
Enforcement promotes environmental justice by equitably targeting pollution problems
that affect low income, minority, and/or tribal communities. Ensuring compliance with
environmental laws is particularly important in communities that are exposed to greater
environmental health risks. EPA fosters community involvement by making information
about compliance and government action available to the public. Increased
transparency is also an effective tool for improving compliance. By making information
on violations both available and understandable, EPA empowers citizens to demand
better compliance.
72
-------
Appendices
73
-------
74
-------
Resources by Appropriation
Summary of Agency Resources by Appropriation
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation Account
Science & Technology (S&T) 1 2
Environmental Programs & Management (EPM)
Inspector General (IG) 1
Buildings & Facilities (B&F)
Inland Oil Spill Programs (OIL)
Superfund (SF)
- Superfund Programs
- Inspector General Transfer
- Science & Technology Transfer
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST)
State & Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 3
Rescission or Cancellation of Prior Year Funds
Agency Total:
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$848,049
$2,993,779
$44,791
$37,001
$18,379
$1,306,541
#7,269,732
$9,975
$26,834
$113,101
$4,978,223
($40,000)
$10,299,864
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$846,049
$2,993,779
$44,791
$37,001
$18,379
$1,306,541
$7,269,732
$9,975
$26,834
$113,101
$4,978,223
($40,000)
$10,297,864
FY2012
President's
Budget
$825,596
$2,876,634
$45,997
$41 ,969
$23,662
$1,236,231
$7,203,206
$70,009
$23,076
$112,481
$3,860,430
($50,000)
$8,973,000
Change
FY 10 EN to
FY12PB
($22,453)
($117,145)
$1,206
$4,968
$5,283
($70,310)
($66,526)
$34
($3,818)
($620)
($1,117,793)
($10,000)
($1,326,864)
NOTE: FY2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
1 Does not include Superfund transfers—see the Superfund line items below for annual amounts.
2 Includes $2 million for FY 2010 in supplementary funding from P.L. 111-212.
3 FY 2010 and FY 2011 resource totals include $8 million in Specified Infrastructure Grants for Hunter's
Point, CA.
75
-------
76
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Science & Technology
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection Program
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Enforcement
Forensics Support
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$9,963.0
$19,797.0
$11,443.0
$2,398.0
$91 ,782.0
$135,383.0
$453.0
$762.0
$2,095.0
$4,176.0
$7,486.0
$15,351.0
FY2010
Actuals
$9,329.3
$20,126.8
$12,480.6
$2,381 .7
$87,648.2
$131,966.6
$485.6
$808.0
$1,962.1
$4,242.7
$7,498.4
$15,245.3
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$9,963.0
$19,797.0
$11,443.0
$2,398.0
$91,782.0
$135,383.0
$453.0
$762.0
$2,095.0
$4,176.0
$7,486.0
$15,351.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$9,797.0
$16,345.0
$7,650.0
$0.0
$100,578.0
$134,370.0
$210.0
$370.0
$2,096.0
$4,082.0
$6,758.0
$15,326.0
($166.0)
($3,452.0)
($3,793.0)
($2,398.0)
$8,796.0
($1,013.0)
($243.0)
($392.0)
$1.0
($94.0)
($728.0)
($25.0)
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Water Sentinel
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Decontamination
Laboratory Preparedness and Response
Safe Building
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$18,576.0
$4,450.0
$23,026.0
$24,857.0
$499.0
$1,996.0
$14,305.0
$41,657.0
$593.0
$65,276.0
$13,953.7
$7,001.2
$20,954.9
$20,448.7
$438.3
$1,225.2
$15,585.7
$37,697.9
$593.0
$59,245.8
$18,576.0
$4,450.0
$23,026.0
$24,857.0
$499.0
$1,996.0
$14,305.0
$41,657.0
$593.0
$65,276.0
$8,632.0
$2,747.0
$11,379.0
$17,382.0
$0.0
$0.0
$12,696.0
$30,078.0
$579.0
$42,036.0
($9,944.0)
($1,703.0)
($11,647.0)
($7,475.0)
($499.0)
($1,996.0)
($1,609.0)
($11,579.0)
($14.0)
($23,240.0)
77
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
FY2010
Actuals
FY2011
Annualized
CR
FY2012
President's
Budget
Change FY10
Enacted to
FY12 PresBud
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Global Change
Clean Air
Research: Air, Climate and Energy (other
activities)
Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate and Energy
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
Drinking Water
Water Quality
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources (other activities)
$4,385.0
$4,054.0
$4,385.0
$4,108.0
$33,947.0
$19,177.0
$10,260.0
$9,534.0
$72,918.0
$72,918.0
$3,750.0
$2,279.0
$537.0
$6,566.0
$20,822.0
$81 ,605.0
$9,022.0
$111,449.0
$111,449.0
$49,103.0
$61,918.0
$34,102.2
$21 ,934.3
$9,218.0
$7,587.2
$72,841.7
$72,841.7
$4,146.4
$2,285.9
$505.1
$6,937.4
$19,646.9
$74,670.2
$8,441 .0
$102,758.1
$102,758.1
$50,346.0
$58,586.9
$33,947.0
$19,177.0
$10,260.0
$9,534.0
$72,918.0
$72,918.0
$3,750.0
$2,279.0
$537.0
$6,566.0
$20,822.0
$81,605.0
$9,022.0
$111,449.0
$111,449.0
$49,103.0
$61,918.0
$35,661.0
$20,195.0
$10,714.0
$9,951 .0
$76,521.0
$76,521.0
$3,839.0
$2,448.0
$544.0
$6,831.0
$20,805.0
$83,102.0
$4,093.0
$108,000.0
$108,000.0
$52,495.0
$66,229.0
($277.0)
$1,714.0
$1,018.0
$454.0
$417.0
$3,603.0
$3,603.0
$169.0
$7.0
$265.0
($17.0)
$1,497.0
($4,929.0)
($3,449.0)
($3,449.0)
$52.0
$0.0
$52.0
$52.0
$3,392.0
$4,311.0
$0.0
78
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Subtotal, Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources
Subtotal, Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Human Health
Ecosystems
Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities (other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable and Healthy
Communities
Subtotal, Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Endocrine Disrupters
Computational Toxicology
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
(other activities)
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and
Sustainability
Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Water: Human Health Protection
Drinking Water Programs
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Total, Science & Technology
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$111,073.0
$111,073.0
$54,180.0
$71 ,698.0
$62,217.0
$188,095.0
$188,095.0
$42,899.0
$11,350.0
$20,044.0
$46,437.0
$77,831 .0
$120,730.0
$3,637.0
$5,700.0
$848,049.0
FY2010
Actuals
$108,932.9
$108,932.9
$54,324.6
$68,805.1
$59,873.0
$183,002.7
$183,002.7
$41,516.4
$12,471.9
$13,929.9
$48,819.3
$75,221.1
$116,737.5
$3,889.3
$4,568.0
$817,677.7
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$111,073.0
$111,073.0
$53,180.0
$70,698.0
$62,217.0
$186,095.0
$186,095.0
$42,899.0
$11,350.0
$20,044.0
$46,437.0
$77,831.0
$120,730.0
$3,637.0
$5,700.0
$846,049.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$118,776.0
$118,776.0
$45,392.0
$60,905.0
$64,729.0
$171,026.0
$171,026.0
$42,400.0
$16,883.0
$21,209.0
$57,565.0
$95,657.0
$138,057.0
$3,787.0
$0.0
$825,596.0
$7,703.0
$7,703.0
($8,788.0)
($10,793.0)
$2,512.0
($17,069.0)
($17,069.0)
($499.0)
$5,533.0
$1,165.0
$11,128.0
$17,826.0
$17,327.0
$150.0
($5,700.0)
($22,453.0)
Environmental Program & Management
Clean Air and Climate
Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs
Climate Protection Program
Energy STAR
$20,791.0
$52,606.0
$20,664.3
$42,138.0
$20,791.0
$52,606.0
$20,842.0
$55,628.0
$51.0
$3,022.0
79
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Methane to markets
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Registry
Climate Protection Program (other activities)
Subtotal, Climate Protection Program
Federal Stationary Source Regulations
Federal Support for Air Quality Management
Federal Support for Air Toxics Program
Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs
Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund
Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate
Indoor Air and Radiation
Indoor Air: Radon Program
Reduce Risks from Indoor Air
Radiation: Protection
Radiation: Response Preparedness
Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation
Brownfields
Brownfields
Compliance
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Incentives
Compliance Monitoring
Subtotal, Compliance
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Enforcement Training
Environmental Justice
NEPA Implementation
Subtotal, Enforcement
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$4,569.0
$16,685.0
$39,184.0
$113,044.0
$27,158.0
$99,619.0
$24,446.0
$5,934.0
$9,840.0
$300,832.0
$5,866.0
$20,759.0
$11,295.0
$3,077.0
$40,997.0
$24,152.0
$25,622.0
$9,560.0
$99,400.0
$134,582.0
$146,636.0
$49,637.0
$3,278.0
$7,090.0
$18,258.0
$224,899.0
FY2010
Actuals
$5,272.8
$15,990.7
$46,324.6
$109,726.1
$26,195.8
$103,224.6
$23,468.8
$6,159.4
$9,840.0
$299,279.0
$5,408.1
$19,253.0
$11,433.3
$2,827.9
$38,922.3
$24,465.3
$23,628.3
$8,792.6
$97,937.7
$130,358.6
$145,896.6
$49,043.2
$3,220.0
$9,567.4
$18,313.4
$226,040.6
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$4,569.0
$16,685.0
$39,184.0
$113,044.0
$27,158.0
$99,619.0
$24,446.0
$5,934.0
$9,840.0
$300,832.0
$5,866.0
$20,759.0
$11,295.0
$3,077.0
$40,997.0
$24,152.0
$25,622.0
$9,560.0
$99,400.0
$134,582.0
$146,636.0
$49,637.0
$3,278.0
$7,090.0
$18,258.0
$224,899.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$5,616.0
$17,646.0
$32,529.0
$111,419.0
$34,096.0
$133,822.0
$0.0
$5,612.0
$9,495.0
$315,286.0
$3,901 .0
$17,198.0
$9,629.0
$3,042.0
$33,770.0
$26,397.0
$0.0
$0.0
$119,648.0
$119,648.0
$191,404.0
$51 ,345.0
$0.0
$7,397.0
$18,072.0
$268,218.0
$1 ,047.0
$961.0
($6,655.0)
($1 ,625.0)
$6,938.0
$34,203.0
($24,446.0)
($322.0)
($345.0)
$14,454.0
($1 ,965.0)
($3,561 .0)
($1 ,666.0)
($35.0)
($7,227.0)
$2,245.0
($25,622.0)
($9,560.0)
$20,248.0
($14,934.0)
$44,768.0
$1 ,708.0
($3,278.0)
$307.0
($186.0)
$43,319.0
Geographic Programs
Great Lakes Restoration
$475,000.0
$430,818.2
$475,000.0
$350,000.0
($125,000.0)
80
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program: Great Lakes
Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay
Geographic Program: Puget Sound
Geographic Program: South Florida
Geographic Program: Mississippi River Basin
Geographic Program: Long Island Sound
Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico
Geographic Program: Lake Champlain
Geographic Program: Other
Lake Pontchartrain
Community Action fora Renewed
Environment (CARE)
Geographic Program: Other (other activities)
Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other
Subtotal, Geographic Programs
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$50,000.0
$0.0
$7,000.0
$50,000.0
$2,168.0
$0.0
$7,000.0
$6,000.0
$4,000.0
$1 ,500.0
$2,448.0
$3,325.0
$7,273.0
$608,441.0
FY2010
Actuals
$53,192.7
$1 ,752.3
$10,087.1
$40,040.4
$2,321 .5
$0.0
$6,141.9
$7,671 .7
$486.9
$996.0
$1 ,648.9
$1,901.0
$4,545.9
$557,058.6
FY2011 FY2012 Change FY10
Annualized President's Enacted to
CR Budget FY12 PresBud
$50,000.0
$0.0
$7,000.0
$50,000.0
$2,168.0
$0.0
$7,000.0
$6,000.0
$4,000.0
$1,500.0
$2,448.0
$3,325.0
$7,273.0
$608,441.0
$67,350.0
$0.0
$4,847.0
$19,289.0
$2,061 .0
$6,000.0
$2,962.0
$4,464.0
$1 ,399.0
$955.0
$2,384.0
$1 ,296.0
$4,635.0
$463,007.0
$17,350.0
$0.0
($2,153.0)
($30,711.0)
($107.0)
$6,000.0
($4,038.0)
($1 ,536.0)
($2,601 .0)
($545.0)
($64.0)
($2,029.0)
($2,638.0)
($145,434.0)
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Communication and Information
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Decontamination
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Decontamination
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
$6,926.0
$7,206.3
$6,926.0
$4,257.0
($2,669.0)
$99.0
$6,737.0
$6,836.0
$3,423.0
$0.0
$3,423.0
$6,369.0
$23,554.0
$156.1
$6,649.0
$6,805.1
$1,573.3
$2,690.9
$4,264.2
$6,300.3
$24,575.9
$99.0
$6,737.0
$6,836.0
$3,423.0
$0.0
$3,423.0
$6,369.0
$23,554.0
$0.0
$1,065.0
$1,065.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$5,978.0
$11,300.0
($99.0)
($5,672.0)
($5,771.0)
($3,423.0)
$0.0
($3,423.0)
($391 .0)
($12,254.0)
Information Exchange / Outreach
Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency
Coordination
Environmental Education
$7,100.0
$9,038.0
$5,715.8
$7,396.6
$7,100.0
$9,038.0
$10,795.0
$9,885.0
$3,695.0
$847.0
81
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations
Exchange Network
Small Business Ombudsman
Small Minority Business Assistance
State and Local Prevention and Preparedness
TRI / Right to Know
Tribal - Capacity Building
Subtotal, Information Exchange / Outreach
International Programs
US Mexico Border
International Sources of Pollution
Trade and Governance
Subtotal, International Programs
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Administrative Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Legal Advice: Support Program
Regional Science and Technology
Integrated Environmental Strategies
Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis
Science Advisory Board
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Rent
Utilities
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$51 ,944.0
$17,024.0
$3,028.0
$2,350.0
$13,303.0
$14,933.0
$12,080.0
$130,800.0
$4,969.0
$8,628.0
$6,227.0
$19,824.0
$5,912.0
$97,410.0
$103,322.0
$5,275.0
$1,147.0
$12,224.0
$42,662.0
$14,419.0
$3,271.0
$18,917.0
$19,404.0
$6,278.0
$123,597.0
$157,040.0
$13,514.0
FY2010
Actuals
$52,787.0
$17,918.5
$3,488.5
$2,133.1
$13,426.7
$15,230.9
$13,040.9
$131,138.0
$4,997.8
$8,514.5
$6,359.8
$19,872.1
$5,881.7
$98,258.9
$104,140.6
$5,424.8
$1,313.8
$12,413.1
$42,826.7
$14,727.9
$3,146.2
$18,366.6
$19,041.3
$6,157.2
$123,417.6
$161,817.5
$2,539.3
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$51,944.0
$17,024.0
$3,028.0
$2,350.0
$13,303.0
$14,933.0
$12,080.0
$130,800.0
$4,969.0
$8,628.0
$6,227.0
$19,824.0
$5,912.0
$97,410.0
$103,322.0
$5,275.0
$1,147.0
$12,224.0
$42,662.0
$14,419.0
$3,271 .0
$18,917.0
$19,404.0
$6,278.0
$123,597.0
$157,040.0
$13,514.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$52,268.0
$20,883.0
$2,953.0
$2,280.0
$14,613.0
$16,463.0
$15,070.0
$145,210.0
$4,912.0
$8,302.0
$6,233.0
$19,447.0
$6,837.0
$88,576.0
$95,413.0
$5,386.0
$1,329.0
$11,685.0
$45,352.0
$15,873.0
$3,283.0
$17,509.0
$22,326.0
$5,867.0
$128,610.0
$170,807.0
$11,221.0
$324.0
$3,859.0
($75.0)
($70.0)
$1,310.0
$1 ,530.0
$2,990.0
$14,410.0
($57.0)
($326.0)
$6.0
($377.0)
$925.0
($8,834.0)
($7,909.0)
$111.0
$182.0
($539.0)
$2,690.0
$1,454.0
$12.0
($1 ,408.0)
$2,922.0
($411.0)
$5,013.0
$13,767.0
($2,293.0)
82
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Security
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Acquisition Management
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Human Resources Management
Recovery Act Mangement and Oversight
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
Pesticides Licensing
Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk
Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability
Science Policy and Biotechnology
Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
RCRA: Waste Management
eManifest
RCRA: Waste Management (other activities)
Subtotal, RCRA: Waste Management
RCRA: Corrective Action
RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling
Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)
Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
Endocrine Disrupters
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and
Reduction
Pollution Prevention Program
Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management
Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program
Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$27,997.0
$116,687.0
$315,238.0
$82,834.0
$32,404.0
$25,487.0
$42,447.0
$0.0
$498,410.0
$62,944.0
$42,203.0
$13,145.0
$1 ,840.0
$120,132.0
$0.0
$68,842.0
$68,842.0
$40,029.0
$14,379.0
$123,250.0
$8,625.0
$54,886.0
$18,050.0
$6,025.0
$14,329.0
$101,915.0
FY2010
Actuals
$27,326.6
$118,555.4
$310,238.8
$86,883.5
$33,272.6
$24,311.6
$43,526.7
$22,237.5
$520,470.7
$62,696.4
$41 ,584.5
$13,508.9
$1,349.5
$119,139.3
$0.0
$71,171.2
$71,171.2
$39,366.0
$13,063.3
$123,600.5
$8,513.2
$53,458.7
$18,014.5
$7,193.0
$13,429.3
$100,608.7
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$27,997.0
$116,687.0
$315,238.0
$82,834.0
$32,404.0
$25,487.0
$42,447.0
$0.0
$498,410.0
$62,944.0
$42,203.0
$13,145.0
$1 ,840.0
$120,132.0
$0.0
$68,842.0
$68,842.0
$40,029.0
$14,379.0
$123,250.0
$8,625.0
$54,886.0
$18,050.0
$6,025.0
$14,329.0
$101,915.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$29,266.0
$113,671.0
$324,965.0
$77,548.0
$34,119.0
$26,223.0
$44,680.0
$0.0
$507,535.0
$58,304.0
$37,913.0
$12,550.0
$1,756.0
$110,523.0
$2,000.0
$64,854.0
$66,854.0
$40,266.0
$9,751.0
$116,871.0
$8,268.0
$70,939.0
$15,653.0
$6,105.0
$14,332.0
$115,297.0
$1 ,269.0
($3,016.0)
$9,727.0
($5,286.0)
$1,715.0
$736.0
$2,233.0
$0.0
$9,125.0
($4,640.0)
($4,290.0)
($595.0)
($84.0)
($9,609.0)
$2,000.0
($3,988.0)
($1,988.0)
$237.0
($4,628.0)
($6,379.0)
($357.0)
$16,053.0
($2,397.0)
$80.0
$3.0
$13,382.0
83
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / LIST)
LUST / UST
Water: Ecosystems
Great Lakes Legacy Act
National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways
Wetlands
Subtotal, Water: Ecosystems
Water: Human Health Protection
Beach / Fish Programs
Drinking Water Programs
Subtotal, Water: Human Health Protection
Water Quality Protection
Marine Pollution
Surface Water Protection
Subtotal, Water Quality Protection
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Total, Environmental Program & Management
Inspector General
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Total, Inspector General
Building and Facilities
Homeland Security
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$12,424.0
$0.0
$32,567.0
$25,940.0
$58,507.0
$2,944.0
$102,224.0
$105,168.0
$13,397.0
$208,626.0
$222,023.0
$16,950.0
$2,993,779.0
$44,791.0
$44,791.0
FY2011 FY2012 Change FY10
FY2010 Annualized President's Enacted to
Actuals CR Budget FY12PresBud
$12,833.9 $12,424.0 $12,866.0
$33,030.3 $0.0 $0.0
$29,796.8 $32,567.0 $27,058.0
$27,130.2 $25,940.0 $27,368.0
$89,957.3 $58,507.0 $54,426.0
$2,981 .4 $2,944.0 $2,708.0
$99,394.2 $102,224.0 $104,616.0
$102,375.6 $105,168.0 $107,324.0
$9,783.7 $13,397.0 $13,417.0
$201,136.3 $208,626.0 $212,069.0
$210,920.0 $222,023.0 $225,486.0
$29,700.0 $16,950.0 $0.0
$2,988,874.6 $2,993,779.0 $2,876,634.0
$49,164.4 $44,791.0 $45,997.0
$49,164.4 $44,791.0 $45,997.0
$442.0
$0.0
($5,509.0)
$1 ,428.0
($4,081.0)
($236.0)
$2,392.0
$2,156.0
$20.0
$3,443.0
$3,463.0
($16,950.0)
($117,145.0)
$1 ,206.0
$1,206.0
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
$8,070.0
$9,652.1
$8,070.0
$8,038.0
($32.0)
84
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
FY2010
Actuals
FY2011
Annualized
CR
FY2012
President's
Budget
Change FY10
Enacted to
FY12 PresBud
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
$28,931.0
$29,896.7
$28,931.0
$33,931.0
$5,000.0
Total, Building and Facilities
$37,001.0
$39,548.8
$37,001.0
$41,969.0
$4,968.0
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Indoor Air and Radiation
Radiation: Protection
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations
Compliance
Compliance Incentives
Compliance Monitoring
Subtotal, Compliance
Enforcement
Environmental Justice
Superfund: Enforcement
Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement
Criminal Enforcement
Enforcement Training
Forensics Support
Subtotal, Enforcement
$2,495.0
$9,975.0
$2,586.2
$9,337.9
$2,495.0
$9,975.0
$2,487.0
$10,009.0
$34.0
$0.0
$1,216.0
$1,216.0
$795.0
$172,668.0
$10,570.0
$8,066.0
$899.0
$2,450.0
$195,448.0
$14.4
$1,181.8
$1,196.2
$891.0
$174,821.5
$9,196.2
$8,417.3
$756.5
$2,727.0
$196,809.5
$0.0
$1,216.0
$1,216.0
$795.0
$172,668.0
$10,570.0
$8,066.0
$899.0
$2,450.0
$195,448.0
$0.0
$1 ,222.0
$1,222.0
$600.0
$169,844.0
$10,530.0
$8,252.0
$0.0
$2,389.0
$191,615.0
$0.0
$6.0
$6.0
($195.0)
($2,824.0)
($40.0)
$186.0
($899.0)
($61 .0)
($3,833.0)
Homeland Security
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection
Decontamination
Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure
Protection
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Decontamination
Laboratory Preparedness and Response
$198.0
$1 ,562.0
$1 ,760.0
$10,798.0
$9,626.0
$1,179.9
$1,269.5
$6,087.1
$5,111.1
$198.0
$1,562.0
$1,760.0
$10,798.0
$9,626.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$5,908.0
$5,635.0
($198.0)
($1,562.0)
($1,760.0)
($4,890.0)
($3,991.0)
85
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery (other activities)
Subtotal, Homeland Security: Preparedness,
Response, and Recovery
Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and
Infrastructure
Subtotal, Homeland Security
Information Exchange / Outreach
Exchange Network
IT / Data Management / Security
Information Security
IT / Data Management
Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security
Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Legal Advice: Environmental Program
Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Rent
Utilities
Security
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management
Acquisition Management
Human Resources Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$33,156.0
$53,580.0
$1,194.0
$56,534.0
$1 ,433.0
$785.0
$17,087.0
$17,872.0
$893.0
$746.0
$1,639.0
$44,300.0
$3,397.0
$8,299.0
$22,486.0
$78,482.0
$2,945.0
$24,684.0
$5,580.0
$27,490.0
$139,181.0
FY2010
Actuals
$40,360.7
$51 ,558.9
$1,194.0
$54,022.4
$1 ,438.6
$524.3
$16,498.3
$17,022.6
$863.5
$658.7
$1,522.2
$44,239.0
$2,630.9
$7,633.1
$21,549.0
$76,052.0
$3,240.9
$23,820.8
$4,332.7
$28,192.2
$135,638.6
FY2011 FY2012 Change FY10
Annualized President's Enacted to
CR Budget FY12 PresBud
$33,156.0
$53,580.0
$1,194.0
$56,534.0
$1,433.0
$785.0
$17,087.0
$17,872.0
$893.0
$746.0
$1,639.0
$44,300.0
$3,397.0
$8,299.0
$22,486.0
$78,482.0
$2,945.0
$24,684.0
$5,580.0
$27,490.0
$139,181.0
$29,119.0
$40,662.0
$1,172.0
$41,834.0
$1 ,433.0
$728.0
$15,352.0
$16,080.0
$927.0
$750.0
$1,677.0
$47,112.0
$3,765.0
$8,282.0
$22,272.0
$81,431.0
$3,243.0
$24,097.0
$7,046.0
$22,252.0
$138,069.0
($4,037.0)
($12,918.0)
($22.0)
($14,700.0)
$0.0
($57.0)
($1 ,735.0)
($1,792.0)
$34.0
$4.0
$38.0
$2,812.0
$368.0
($17.0)
($214.0)
$2,949.0
$298.0
($587.0)
$1,466.0
($5,238.0)
($1,112.0)
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$21,264.0
$22,525.3
$21,264.0
$17,706.0
($3,558.0)
86
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
Human Health Risk Assessment
Superfund Cleanup
Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal
Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness
Superfund: Federal Facilities
Superfund: Remedial
Superfund: Support to Other Federal Agencies
Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup
Total, Hazardous Substance Superfund
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$3,404.0
$202,330.0
$9,632.0
$32,105.0
$605,438.0
$6,575.0
$856,080.0
$1,306,541.0
$0.0
FY2010
Actuals
$3,169.1
$225,840.0
$9,667.5
$33,605.0
$693,835.2
$6,575.0
$969,522.7
$1,414,791.3
$0.0
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$3,404.0
$202,330.0
$9,632.0
$32,105.0
$605,438.0
$6,575.0
$856,080.0
$1,306,541.0
$0.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$3,342.0
$194,895.0
$9,263.0
$26,242.0
$574,499.0
$5,858.0
$810,757.0
$1,236,231.0
$832.0
($62.0)
($7,435.0)
($369.0)
($5,863.0)
($30,939.0)
($717.0)
($45,323.0)
($70,310.0)
$832.0
Compliance
Compliance Assistance and Centers
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Rent
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Acquisition Management
Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
$797.0
$162.0
$756.8
$152.3
$797.0
$162.0
$0.0
$0.0
$208.0
$904.0
$165.0
$1,115.0
$2,184.0
$175.9
$871.9
$172.4
$1,312.0
$2,356.3
$208.0
$904.0
$165.0
$1,115.0
$2,184.0
$220.0
$916.0
$163.0
$512.0
$1,591.0
($797.0)
($162.0)
$0.0
$12.0
$12.0
($2.0)
($603.0)
($593.0)
Underground Storage Tanks (LUST/ UST)
LUST/UST
LUST Cooperative Agreements
$11,613.0
$63,570.0
$17,901.7
$55,963.6
$11,613.0
$63,570.0
$11,982.0
$63,192.0
$369.0
($378.0)
87
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
FY2010
Actuals
FY2011
Annualized
CR
FY2012
President's
Budget
Change FY10
Enacted to
FY12 PresBud
LUST Prevention
Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / LIST)
$34,430.0 $35,030.1 $34,430.0 $34,430.0
$109,613.0 $108,895.4 $109,613.0 $109,604.0
$0.0
($9.0)
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$345.0
$422.5
$345.0
$454.0
$109.0
Total, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
$113,101.0
$112,583.3
$113,101.0
$112,481.0
($620.0)
Inland Oil Spill Programs
Compliance
Compliance Assistance and Centers
Compliance Monitoring
Subtotal, Compliance
$269.0
$0.0
$269.0
$263.7
$0.0
$263.7
$269.0
$0.0
$269.0
$0.0
$138.0
$138.0
($269.0)
$138.0
($131.0)
Enforcement
Civil Enforcement
IT / Data Management / Security
IT / Data Management
Oil
Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response
Operations and Administration
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Rent
Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other
activities)
Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations
Subtotal, Operations and Administration
1,998.0
$24.0
$14,944.0
$438.0
$2,082.8
$24.0
$13,494.8
$438.0
$1,998.0
$24.0
$14,944.0
$438.0
$2,902.0
$0.0
$19,472.0
$438.0
$904.0
($24.0)
$4,528.0
$0.0
$67.0
$505.0
$505.0
$51.4
$489.4
$489.4
$67.0
$505.0
$505.0
$98.0
$536.0
$536.0
$31.0
$31.0
$31.0
Research: Sustainable Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
$639.0
$549.7
$614.0
($25.0)
Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs
$18,379.0
$16,904.4
$18,379.0
$23,662.0
$5,283.0
88
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
State and Tribal Assistance Grants
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF
Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages
Brownfields Projects
Clean School Bus Initiative
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
Targeted Airshed Grants
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border
Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection
Categorical Grant: Brownfields
Categorical Grant: Environmental Information
Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial
Assistance
Categorical Grant: Homeland Security
Categorical Grant: Lead
Categorical Grant: Local Govt Climate Change
Categorical Grant: Multi-Media Tribal Implementation
Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement
Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106)
Monitoring Grants
Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106) (other activities)
Subtotal, Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec.
106)
Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention
Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision
(PWSS)
Categorical Grant: Radon
Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality
Management
Categorical Grant: Sector Program
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$2,100,000.0
$1 ,387,000.0
$13,000.0
$100,000.0
$0.0
$60,000.0
$20,000.0
$17,000.0
$3,697,000.0
$9,900.0
$49,495.0
$10,000.0
$103,346.0
$0.0
$14,564.0
$10,000.0
$0.0
$200,857.0
$18,711.0
$13,520.0
$18,500.0
$210,764.0
$229,264.0
$4,940.0
$105,700.0
$8,074.0
$226,580.0
$0.0
FY2010
Actuals
$1,695,365.8
$1,143,484.5
$16,634.7
$133,697.0
$68.2
$115,807.2
$10,000.0
$24,503.5
$3,139,560.9
$10,194.2
$56,100.7
$10,618.9
$103,161.8
$2,863.1
$15,162.6
$9,500.0
$0.0
$194,818.5
$18,494.3
$13,195.4
$18,314.0
$207,627.1
$225,941.1
$4,484.8
$107,095.7
$8,572.4
$223,152.7
$202.6
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$2,100,000.0
$1,387,000.0
$13,000.0
$100,000.0
$0.0
$60,000.0
$20,000.0
$17,000.0
$3,697,000.0
$9,900.0
$49,495.0
$10,000.0
$103,346.0
$0.0
$14,564.0
$10,000.0
$0.0
$200,857.0
$18,711.0
$13,520.0
$18,500.0
$210,764.0
$229,264.0
$4,940.0
$105,700.0
$8,074.0
$226,580.0
$0.0
FY2012
President's
Budget
$1 ,550,000.0
$990,000.0
$10,000.0
$99,041.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$10,000.0
$2,659,041.0
$9,900.0
$49,495.0
$10,200.0
$103,412.0
$0.0
$14,855.0
$0.0
$20,000.0
$164,757.0
$19,085.0
$13,140.0
$11,300.0
$238,964.0
$250,264.0
$5,039.0
$109,700.0
$8,074.0
$305,500.0
$0.0
Change FY10
Enacted to
FY12 PresBud
($550,000.0)
($397,000.0)
($3,000.0)
($959.0)
$0.0
($60,000.0)
($20,000.0)
($7,000.0)
($1,037,959.0)
$0.0
$0.0
$200.0
$66.0
$0.0
$291.0
($10,000.0)
$20,000.0
($36,100.0)
$374.0
($380.0)
($7,200.0)
$28,200.0
$21 ,000.0
$99.0
$4,000.0
$0.0
$78,920.0
$0.0
89
-------
Program/Projects by Program Area
Program/Projects by Program Area
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Program Area
Program/Project
Sub-Program/ Project
Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds
Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance
Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management
Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program
Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks
Categorical Grant: Water Quality Cooperative
Agreements
Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development
Subtotal, Categorical Grants
Congressional Priorities
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Total, State and Tribal Assistance Grants
FY2010
Enacted
Budget
$0.0
$5,099.0
$13,300.0
$62,875.0
$10,891.0
$2,500.0
$0.0
$16,830.0
$1,116,446.0
$156,777.0
$4,970,223.0
FY2010
Actuals
$2,827.2
$5,401 .9
$13,408.0
$65,746.2
$11,323.6
$3,184.3
$63.0
$16,236.1
$1,121,749.1
$141,665.5
$4,402,975.5
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$0.0
$5,099.0
$13,300.0
$62,875.0
$10,891.0
$2,500.0
$0.0
$16,830.0
$1,116,446.0
$156,777.0
$4,970,223.0
FY2012 Change FY10
President's Enacted to
Budget FY12 PresBud
$0.0
$5,201 .0
$13,566.0
$71 ,375.0
$11,109.0
$1 ,550.0
$0.0
$15,167.0
$1,201,389.0
$0.0
$3,860,430.0
$0.0
$102.0
$266.0
$8,500.0
$218.0
($950.0)
$0.0
($1 ,663.0)
$84,943.0
($156,777.0)
($1,109,793.0)
SUBTOTAL, EPA (Excludes Rescission or Cancellation
of Prior Year Funds)
$10,331,864.0 $9,842,520.0 $10,329,864.0 $9,023,000.0
($1,308,864.0)
Rescission or Cancellation of Prior Year Funds
($40,000.0)
$0.0
($40,000.0) ($50,000.0)
($10,000.0)
SUBTOTAL, EPA
$10,291,864.0 $9,842,520.0 $10,289,864.0 $8,973,000.0 ($1,318,864.0)
Specified Infrastructure Grants:
Hunter's Point, California 1
TOTAL, EPA + Specified Infrastructure Grants
$8,000.0
$10,299,864.0
$8,000.0
$9,850,520.0
$8,000.0
$10,297,864.0
$0.0
$8,973,000.0
($8,000.0)
($1,326,864.0)
Notes: FY 2010 Actuals include obligations of carryover.
FY 2010 Actuals include ARRA obligations.
FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding
supplemental appropriations.
1 Hunter's Point funds transferred to Department of the Navy 2nd Quarter FY 2010.
90
-------
EPA Research and Development
Transformational Solutions through Science Innovation
EPA's Office of Research and Development provides critical support to the Agency's
environmental policy decisions and regulatory actions to protect human health and the
environment. EPA research has provided effective solutions to environmental problems
for the past 40 years. The Agency's research has informed risk reduction approaches
that have resulted in cleaner air, land and water. However, today's increasingly
complex public health and environmental problems require an evolved approach to
research. Scientific innovation is needed to produce transformational solutions beyond
those more narrowly targeted to single chemicals or problems.
To address these new challenges, in FY 2012 EPA is strengthening its planning and
delivery of science by implementing an integrated research approach that looks at
problems from a systems perspective. Research will leverage the diverse capabilities of
in-house scientists and engineers and bridge traditional scientific disciplines. In
addition, research plans will incorporate input from external stakeholders such as
Federal, State, and local government agencies, non-governmental organizations,
industry, and communities affected by environmental problems.
EPA will implement this new approach by realigning and integrating the work of twelve
of its base research programs into four new research programs:
• Air, Climate, and Energy
• Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
• Sustainable and Healthy Communities
• Chemical Safety and Sustainability
This integration capitalizes on existing
capabilities and promotes the use of a
transdisciplinary perspective to further
EPA's mission.
For example, available tools have failed
to fully address complex aspects of
chemical risk such as the impact of life-
stage vulnerability, genetic susceptibility, disproportionate exposures, and cumulative
risk. By formally integrating chemicals research, EPA will combine developments in
computational, physico-chemical, and biological science to advance science in the
sustainable development, use, and assessment of chemicals.
Within the new integrated programs, EPA will continue research to address targeted,
existing problems and provide technical support, with an emphasis on sustainable
applications and outcomes. The Human Health Risk Assessment and Homeland
Security Research programs also will continue as key components of EPA's overall
research portfolio.
91
-------
EPA Research and Development
Office of Research and Development:
NEW Program/Project Structure1
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Science &
Technology
LUST
Inland Oil Spills
Superfund
Program/Project
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Homeland Security: Total Program
Preparedness, Decontamination
Response, and Recovery Safe BuMngs
Other Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Air, Climate Total Program
and Energy Global Change Research
Clean Air Research
Other Research
Research: Safe and Total Program
Sustainable Water Drinking Water Research
Resources Wgfer Qua//fy pesearch
Research: Sustainable Total Program
and Healthy Communities Human Health Research
Ecosystems Research
Other Research
Research: Chemical Total Program
Safety and Sustainability Endocrine Disrupters
Research
Computational Toxicology
Research
Other Research
S&T Appropriation Total
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Superfund Appropriation Total
GRAND TOTAL
FY 2010 Enacted
$000
$4,700
FTE
0.0
$32,861 1 55.5
$20, 890 | 40.2
#7,996 1 0.0
#9, 975 | 15.3
$42,899J 167.6
$111,449J 313.6
$20, 822 | 35.5
#87,605 1 268.5
$9,022 \ 9.6
$111,073J 427.0
#49, 729 | 790.2
#67,944 1 236.8
$188,095 1 551.1
#54, 7 80 | 706.7
#77, 698 | 272.4
#62, 27 7 1 772.0
$77,831 1 283.7
#77,350
#20,044
#46,437
$568,908
$345
$639
$2,166
50.7
32.7
200.9
1,798.5
1.9
0.9
2.0
$3,404J 14.9
$21,264
$26,834
93.1
110.0
$596,726 1,911.3
FY2011 CR2
$000
$4,700
FTE
0.0
$32,861 55.5
#20,890 1 40.2
#7,996
0.0
#9,975 75.3
$42,899 167.6
$111,449 313.6
#20,822 35.5
#87,605 268.5
#9,022 9.6
$111,073 427.0
#49,729 790.2
#67,944
236.8
$186,095 551.1
#53,780 706.7
#70,698 272.4
#62,277 772.0
$77,831 283.7
#77,350
#20,044
#46,437
$566,908
$345
$639
$2,166
50.7
32.7
200.9
1,798.5
1.9
0.9
2.0
$3,404 14.9
$21,264
$26,834
93.1
110.0
$594,726 1,911.3
FY 2012 PresBud3
$000
$0
FTE
0.0
$24,684 62.7
#75,637 44.0
#0 0.0
#9,047 78.7
$42,400 180.9
$108,000 309.6
#20,805 47.2
#83,702 267.8
#4,093 6.6
$118,776 439.6
#52,527
796.2
#66,255 243.4
$170,526 529.7
#45,392 772.2
#60,905 255.7
#64,229 767.8
$95,657 292.7
#76,883
#27,209
#57,565
$560,043
$454
$614
$1,968
46.7
34.4
272.2
1,815.2
1.6
0.9
2.0
$3,342 14.9
$17,706
$23,016
89.5
106.4
$584,127 1,924.1
Delta: 12 PB- 10 EN
$000
-$4,700
FTE
0.0
-$8,177 7.2
-#5,253 1 3.8
-#7,996
0.0
-#928 3.4
-$499 13.3
-$3,449 -4.0
-#77 5.7
#7,497 -6.7
-#4,929 -3.0
$7,703 12.6
#3,392 6.0
#4,377
6.6
-$17,569 -21.4
-#8,788 5.5
-#70,793 -76.7
#2,072 -70.2
$17,826 9.0
#5,533
#7,765
#77,728
-$8,865
$109
-$25
-$198
-4.0
7.7
77.3
16.7
-0.3
0.0
0.0
-$62 0.0
-$3,558
-$3,818
-3.6
-3.6
-$12,599 12.8
1 FY 2010 Enacted includes the $2M supplemental for research to determine human health and environmental impacts of oil spill dispersants.
Differences in totals between new and former program areas reflect transfers and cross-walk adjustments for workforce support costs.
2 FY 2011 CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
3 FY 2012 total for Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities excludes $0.5M in Agency green conferencing resources not included as part of the
Office of Research and Development budget.
92
-------
EPA Research and Development
Office of Research and Development:
OLD Program/Project Structure1
(Dollars in Thousands)
Appropriation
Science &
Technology
LUST
Inland Oil Spills
Superfund
Program/Project
Congressionally Mandated Projects
Homeland Security: Total Program
Preparedness, Decontamination
Response, and Recovery Safe BuMngs
Other Research
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Global Change
Research: Clean Air
Research: Drinking Water
Research: Water Quality
Research: Human Health Total Program
and Ecosystems Human Health Research
Ecosystems Research
Other Research "
Research: Land Protection and Restoration
Research: Fellowships
Research: Sustainability
Research: Pesticides and Toxics
Research: Endocrine Disruptors
Research: Computational Toxicology
S&T Appropriation Total
Research: Land Protection and Restoration
Research: Land Protection and Restoration
Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and
Recovery
Human Health Risk Assessment
Research: Sustainability
Research: Land Protection and Restoration
Superfund Appropriation Total
GRAND TOTAL
FY 2010 Enacted
$000
$4,700
$32,861
520,890
$1,996
$9,975
$44,789
$20,826
$81,917
$49,155
$61,918
$161,511
$84,904
$76,607
$0
$14,111
$11,083
$27,287
$27,347
$11,355
$20,048
$568,908
$345
$639
$2,166
$3,404
$73
$21,191
$26,834
FTE
0.0
55.5
40.2
0.0
15.3
173.7
35.5
269.5
190.2
236.8
484.9
277.2
273.7
0.0
58.8
2.6
70.8
137.4
50.1
32.7
1,798.5
1.9
0.9
2.0
14.9
0.0
93.1
110.0
$596,726 1,911.3
FY2011 CR2
$000
$4,700
$32,861
520,890
57,996
FTE
0.0
55.5
40.2
0.0
59,975 75.3
$44,789 173.7
$20,826 35.5
$81,917
269.5
$49,155 190.2
$61,918
$159,511
583,904
236.8
484.9
277.2
575,607 273.7
50
$14,111
$11,083
0.0
58.8
2.6
$27,287 70.8
$27,347 137.4
$11,355
$20,048
$566,908
$345
$639
$2,166
50.1
32.7
1,798.5
1.9
0.9
2.0
$3,404 14.9
$73 0.0
$21,191
$26,834
93.1
110.0
$594,726 1,911.3
FY 2012 PresBud3
$000
$0
FTE
0.0
$24,684 62.7
575,637 1 44.0
50
0.0
59,047 78.7
$44,108
187.4
$20,810 41.2
$83,313 262.8
$52,547 196.2
$66,229 243.4
$145,444 475.0
545,392
560,905
772.2
255.7
539,747 707.7
$13,601
$17,261
57.3
6.4
$26,788 67.0
$27,159
135.3
$16,888 46.1
$21,211
$560,043
$454
$614
$1,968
34.4
1,815.2
1.6
0.9
2.0
$3,342 14.9
$0 0.0
$17,706
$23,016
89.5
106.4
$584,127 1,924.1
Delta: 12 PB- 10 EN
$000
-$4,700
-$8,177
FTE
0.0
7.2
-55, 253 | 3.8
-57,996
0.0
-5928 3.4
-$681 13.7
-$16 5.7
$1,396
-6.7
$3,392 6.0
$4,311 6.6
-$16,067 -9.9
-539,572 -99.0
-575,702 -78.0
539,747 707.7
-$510 -1.5
$6,178
3.8
-$499 -3.8
-$188 -2.1
$5,533 -4.0
$1,163
-$8,865
$109
-$25
-$198
1.7
16.7
-0.3
0.0
0.0
-$62 0.0
-$73 0.0
-$3,485
-$3,818
-3.6
-3.6
-$12,599 12.8
1 FY 2010 Enacted includes the $2M supplemental for research to determine human health and environmental impacts of oil spill dispersants.
Differences in totals between new and former program areas reflect transfers and cross-walk adjustments for workforce support costs.
2 FY 2011 CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
3 FY 2012 total for Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities excludes $0.5M in Agency green conferencing resources not included as part of the
Office of Research and Development budget.
4 FY 2012 resources for nanotechnology and other areas will now appear separately from the Human Health and Ecosystems research areas.
93
-------
94
-------
Categorical Grants
Categorical Program Grants (STAG)
by National Program and State Grant
(Dollars in Thousands)
NPM / Grant
Air & Radiation
State and Local Assistance
Tribal Air Quality Management
Radon
Local Government Climate Change
Water
Pollution Control (Section 106)
Beaches Protection
Nonpoint Source (Section 319)
Wetlands Program Development
Targeted Watersheds
Water Quality Cooperative Agreements
Drinking Water
Public Water System Supervision (PWSS)
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Homeland Security
Hazardous Waste
H.W. Financial Assistance
Brownfields
Underground Storage Tanks
Pesticides & Toxics
Pesticides Program Implementation
Lead
Toxic Substances Compliance
Pesticides Enforcement
Multimedia
Environmental Information
Pollution Prevention
Sector Program (Enf & Comp Assurance)
Tribal General Assistance Program
Tribal Implementation
Total Categorical Grants
FY2010
Enacted
$226,580
$13,300
$8,074
$10,000
$257,954
$229,264
$9,900
$200,857
$16,830
$0
$0
$456,851
$105,700
$10,891
$0
$116,591
$103,346
$49,495
$2,500
$155,341
$13,520
$14,564
$5,099
$18,711
$51,894
$10,000
$4,940
$0
$62,875
$0
$77,815
$1,116,446
FY2010
Actuals
$223,153
$13,408
$8,572
$9,500
$254,633
$225,941
$10,194
$194,819
$16,236
$2,827
$63
$450,080
$107,096
$11,324
$2,863
$121,282
$103,162
$56,101
$3,184
$162,447
$13,195
$15,163
$5,402
$18,494
$52,254
$10,619
$4,485
$203
$65,746
$0
$81,053
$1,121,749
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$226,580
$13,300
$8,074
$10,000
$257,954
$229,264
$9,900
$200,857
$16,830
$0
$0
$456,851
$105,700
$10,891
$0
$116,591
$103,346
$49,495
$2,500
$155,341
$13,520
$14,564
$5,099
$18,711
$51,894
$10,000
$4,940
$0
$62,875
$0
$77,815
$1,116,446
FY2012
PresBud
$305,500
$13,566
$8,074
$0
$327,140
$250,264
$9,900
$164,757
$15,167
$0
$0
$440,088
$109,700
$11,109
$0
$120,809
$103,412
$49,495
$1 ,550
$154,457
$13,140
$14,855
$5,201
$19,085
$52,281
$10,200
$5,039
$0
$71 ,375
$20,000
$106,614
$1,201,389
Delta
FY12PB-
FY10 EN
$78,920
$266
$0
($10,000)
$69,186
$21,000
$0
($36,100)
($1 ,663)
$0
$0
($16,763)
$4,000
$218
$0
$4,218
$66
$0
($950)
($884)
($380)
$291
$102
$374
$387
$200
$99
$0
$8,500
$20,000
$28,799
$84,943
% Change
34.8%
2.0%
0.0%
-100.0%
26.8%
9.2%
0.0%
-18.0%
-9.9%
0.0%
0.0%
-3.7%
3.8%
2.0%
0.0%
3.6%
0.1%
0.0%
-38.0%
-0.6%
-2.8%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
0.7%
2.0%
2.0%
0.0%
13.5%
0.0%
37.0%
7.6%|
NOTES: Totals may not add due to rounding.
FY 2010 Actuals include obligations of carryover.
95
-------
96
-------
Categorical Grants
Categorical Grants Program (STAG)
(Dollars in millions)
$1,400-
$1,200-
$1,000-
$800-
$600-
$400-
$200-
$1,143 $1>16i
$1 .079 s *< =i
$1,006
f
1
|
1
|
1
1
I
I
t'
'y
»
^
.»=|
i
i
i
i
i
i
f
i
i
i
i
i
1
1
i
i
i
R
1
1
1
1
$1.137 $1,113 $1,113 ,,-7- $1,095 $1-116 $1'116
jtmaaaaat . .$1.0/8
!
\
I
|
!
i
i
\
j
'i
t
t
t
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
1
;•
1
1
J!
;•
S
;•
I
:'
I
;•
I
j
;•
j
I
1
1
\
1
'1
'•}
t
j
•(
1
f
'i
>
\
\
\
§
I
H
1
1
1
M
$
M
M
s
1
i
i
P
i
^
^
^
1
!
I
I
;'
!
1
\
\
''*
fi
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
1
i
i
i
if
!
;•
1
1
$1,201
1
\
\
1
1
i
1
1
s
>
I
I
1
' * 9
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN CR PB
*Does not account for rescissions or cancellation.
*EN - Enacted, PB - President's Budget, CR - Annualized Continuing Resolution (represents an
annualized continuing resolution based on FY2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental
appropriations.
Categorical Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests a total of $1.201 billion for 20 "categorical" program grants for
state, interstate organizations, non-profit organizations, intertribal consortia, and tribal
governments. EPA will continue to pursue its strategy of building and supporting state,
local and tribal capacity to implement, operate, and enforce the nation's environmental
laws. Most environmental laws envision establishment of a decentralized nationwide
structure to protect public health and the environment. In this way, environmental goals
will ultimately be achieved through the actions, programs, and commitments of state,
tribal and local governments, organizations and citizens.
The Agency is proposing a new multimedia grant to tribal governments in FY 2012 to
facilitate environmental program implementation on tribal lands. This new grant will
support tribes as they move beyond capacity building to program implementation.
Also, to strengthen grants management, EPA, working with the states, has issued a
new policy that replaces the State Grant Performance Measures Template. The policy is
intended to 1) enhance accountability for achieving grant performance objectives; 2)
ensure that State grants are aligned with the Agency's Strategic Plan; and 3) provide for
more consistent performance reporting. To achieve those objectives, the policy
requires that state categorical grant workplans and associated progress reports
97
-------
Categorical Grants
prominently display three "Essential Elements: the EPA Strategic Plan Goal; the EPA
Strategic Plan Objective; and workplan commitments plus time frame. Regions and
states will begin to transition to the new policy in FY 2012 with the goal of 100%
compliance for all grants awarded on or after October 1, 2012.
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to offer flexibility to state and tribal governments to
manage their environmental programs as well as provide technical and financial
assistance to achieve mutual environmental goals. First, EPA and its state and tribal
partners will continue implementing the National Environmental Performance
Partnership System (NEPPS). NEPPS is designed to allow states more flexibility to
operate their programs, while increasing emphasis on measuring and reporting
environmental improvements. Second, Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) will
continue to allow states and tribes funding flexibility to combine categorical program
grants to address environmental priorities.
HIGHLIGHTS:
State & Local Air Quality Management, Radon, and Tribal Air Quality
Management Grants
The FY 2012 request includes $327.1 million for grants to support state, local, and tribal
air management and radon programs, an increase of $79.2 million. Grant funds for
State and Local Air Quality Management and Tribal Air Quality Management are
requested in the amounts of $305.5 million and $13.6 million, respectively. These funds
provide resources to multi-state, state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies for
the development and implementation of programs for the prevention and control of air
pollution and for the implementation of National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) set to protect public health and the environment. In FY 2012, EPA will
continue to work with state and local air pollution control agencies to develop or
implement state implementation plans (SIPs) for NAAQS (including the 8-hour ozone
standard, the fine particle (PM-2.5) standard, the lead standard) and also for regional
haze. In addition, EPA will continue support of state and local operation of the 27-site
National Air Toxics Trends Stations network. In FY 2012, states with approved or
delegated permitting programs will continue to implement new greenhouse gas
requirements as part of their permitting programs.
EPA will work with federally-recognized tribal governments nationwide to continue
development and implementation of tribal air quality management programs. Tribes are
active in protection of air quality for the 4 percent of the land mass of the United States
over which they have sovereignty, and work closely with EPA to monitor and report air
quality information from over 300 monitors. Lastly, this request includes $8.1 million for
Radon grants to continue funding priority activities that reduce health risks. These
activities include reducing radon levels in existing homes and promoting the
construction of new homes with radon reducing features.
98
-------
Categorical Grants
Water Pollution Control (Clean Water Act Section 106) Grants
The FY 2012 EPA request includes $250.3 million for Water Pollution Control grants.
The $21 million increase will strengthen the base state, interstate and tribal programs,
address water quality issues such as nutrients and new program requirements, and
support expanded water monitoring and enforcement efforts. This grant program assists
state and tribal efforts to restore and maintain the quality of the nation's water quality
standards, improving water quality monitoring and assessment, implementing Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and other watershed-related plans, strengthening the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program,
implementing practices to reduce pollution from all nonpoint sources, and supporting
sustainable water infrastructure. EPA will work with states to implement the new rules
governing discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and will
continue to revise the stormwater regulations to better protect the nation's waters from
stormwater discharges. EPA intends to propose more protective standards on
discharges from newly developed and redeveloped sites. States and authorized tribes
will continue to review and update their water quality standards as required by the Clean
Water Act. EPA encourages states to continually review and update the water quality
criteria in their standards to reflect the latest scientific information from EPA and other
sources. EPA's goal for FY 2012 is that 64.3 percent of states will have updated their
standards to reflect the latest scientific information in the past three years. In FY 2012,
$18.5 million will be designated for states and tribes that participate in collecting
statistically valid water monitoring data and implement enhancements in their water
monitoring programs.
Wetlands Grants
In FY 2012, the request includes $15.2 million for Wetlands Program grants, which
provide technical and financial assistance to the states, tribes, and local governments.
These grants support development of state and tribal wetland programs that further the
goals of the CWA and improve water quality in watersheds throughout the country.
Public Water System Supervision Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests $109.7 million for Public Water System Supervision (PWSS)
grants. These grants provide assistance to implement and enforce National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations to ensure the safety of the Nation's drinking water
resources and to protect public health. In FY 2012, The Agency is requesting an
additional $4 million to support state data management, improve data quality, and allow
the public access to compliance monitoring data not previously available. The
increased funding will support associated program support costs or in-kind assistance
for the benefit of states working in concert with the Agency to collect and display all
compliance monitoring data as part of implementing the Drinking Water Strategy. This
will improve transparency and efficiency as it will replace the Safe Drinking Water
Information System/State Version (SDWIS/State) and reduce the need for state
resources to maintain individual compliance databases.
99
-------
Categorical Grants
Underground Injection Control (UIC) Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests $11.1 million for the Underground Injection Control grants
program. Ensuring safe underground injection of waste materials and other fluids is a main
component of a comprehensive source water protection program. Grants are provided to
states that have primary enforcement authority (primacy) to implement and maintain UIC
programs. EPA and the states will continue to address wells of all classes determined
to be in violation of the UIC regulations and will close or permit Motor Vehicle Waste
Disposal wells (Class V) that are identified during FY 2012. Authorized states will
implement a new rule finalized in December 2010 that establishes a new class of
underground injection well - Class VI - with new federal requirements to allow the
injection of C02 for the purpose of Geological Sequestration (GS), facilitating the
permitting of large scale commercial carbon sequestration in FY 2012.
BEACH Act Grants
The FY 2012 request includes $9.9 million for the 35 states, territories, and eligible
tribes with Great Lakes or coastal shorelines to protect public health at the nation's
beaches. The Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act (BEACH
Act) of October 2000 authorizes EPA to award grants to help eligible states, territories
and tribes develop and implement beach bacteria monitoring and notification programs.
These programs inform the public about the risk of exposure to disease-causing
microorganisms in coastal waters (including the Great Lakes).
Non-Point Source Program Grants (NPS - Clean Water Act Section 319)
In FY 2012, EPA requests $164.8 million for Nonpoint Source Program grants to states,
territories, and tribes. These grants enable states to use a range of tools to implement
their programs including: both non-regulatory and regulatory programs, technical
assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, and
demonstration projects. This request level represents a reduction that will decrease
funding for nonpoint source projects, one of the choices the Agency made to meet
federal deficit reduction goals. The request also eliminates the statutory one-third of
one-percent cap on Clean Water Act Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution grants that
may be awarded to tribes. In FY 2012, EPA will begin to implement some program
reforms, including incentives to states to implement more effective nonpoint source
management programs.
Tribal General Assistance Program Grants
In FY2012, EPA will provide $71.4 million in GAP grants, an increase of $8.5 million, to
help build tribal environmental capacity to assess environmental conditions, utilize
available information, and build an environmental program tailored to tribes' needs. The
grants will develop tribal environmental education and outreach programs, promote
coordination between federal, state, local and tribal environmental officials, and alert
100
-------
Categorical Grants
EPA to serious conditions that pose immediate public health and ecological threats.
This additional funding of $8.5 million will allow 45 more tribes, for a total universe of
574 tribes and intertribal consortia, to have the opportunity to access an environmental
presence.
Multi-Media Tribal Implementation Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests $20.0 million for a new multi-media grant program, which will be
tailored to address an individual tribe's most serious environmental needs through the
implementation of environmental programs and projects. These grants will build upon the
environmental capacity developed under the Indian General Assistance Program (GAP),
but will focus on transitioning a tribe into program implementation. This new program is
designed to be flexible and will allow tribes to work with EPA to collaboratively identify high
priority areas for individual tribes and target grant resources to address those critical needs.
The multi-media grant program will facilitate self-government, ensure that environmental
priorities on Tribal lands are addressed to the fullest extent possible, and help fulfill
EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment in Indian country.
Pesticide Enforcement and Toxics Substance Compliance Grants
The FY 2012 request includes $24.3 million to build environmental enforcement
partnerships with states and tribes and to strengthen their ability to address
environmental and public health threats. The enforcement state grants request consists
of $19.1 million for Pesticides Enforcement and $5.2 million for Toxic Substances
Enforcement Grants. State and tribal enforcement grants will be awarded to assist in
the implementation of compliance and enforcement provisions of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA). These grants support state and tribal compliance activities to protect the
environment from harmful chemicals and pesticides.
Under the Pesticides Enforcement Grant program, EPA provides resources to states
and Indian tribes to conduct FIFRA compliance inspections and take appropriate
enforcement actions and implement programs for farm worker protection. The program
also sponsors training for state and tribal inspectors through the Pesticide Inspector
Residential Program (PIRT) and for state and tribal managers through the Pesticide
Regulatory Education Program (PREP). Under the Toxic Substances Compliance
Grant program, "non-waiver" states inspect on behalf of EPA and receive funding for
compliance inspections of asbestos and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and "waiver"
states inspect under their own regulations and receive funding for compliance
inspections and enforcement of the asbestos program. States also receive funding for
implementation of the state lead-base paint certification and training, abatement
notification and work practice standards compliance and enforcement program. The
funds will complement other Federal program grants for building state capacity for lead
abatement, and enhancing compliance with disclosure, certification and training
requirements.
101
-------
Categorical Grants
Pesticides Program Implementation Grants
The FY 2012 request includes $13.1 million for Pesticides Program Implementation
grants. These resources will assist states, tribes, and partners with pesticide worker
safety activities, protection of endangered species and water sources, and promotion of
environmental stewardship approaches to pesticide use. EPA's mission as related to
pesticides is to protect human health and the environment from pesticide risk and to
realize the value of pesticide availability by considering the economic, social and
environmental costs and benefits of the use of pesticides. Pesticides Program
Implementation Grants help state programs stay current with changing requirements.
Lead Grants
The FY 2012 request includes $14.9 million for lead grants. This funding will support
assistance to states, territories, the District of Columbia, and tribes to develop and
implement authorized programs for the lead-based paint abatement program to operate
in lieu of the federal program. Additionally, the program will provide support to those
entities to develop and implement authorized Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP)
Programs. EPA implements these programs in all areas of the country that are not
authorized to do so. Activities conducted as part of this program include accrediting
training programs, certifying individuals and firms, and providing education and
compliance assistance to those subject to the abatement and RRP regulations and the
general public. Another activity that this funding will support is the collection of lead data
to determine the nature and extent of the lead problem within an area so that states,
tribes and the Agency can better target remaining areas of high risk.
EPA recognizes that additional attention and assistance must be given to vulnerable
populations including those with rates of lead poisoning in excess of the national
average. In FY 2012, EPA will continue to award Targeted Grants to Reduce Childhood
Lead Poisoning. These grants are available to a wide range of applicants, including
state and local governments, Federally-recognized Indian tribes and intertribal
consortia, territories, institutions of higher learning, and nonprofit organizations.
Funding in this program is also used to track the disparities in blood lead levels between
low-income children and non-low-income children. The program uses the data collected
to track progress toward eliminating childhood lead poisoning in these vulnerable
populations.
Pollution Prevention Grants
The FY 2012 request includes $5.0 million for Pollution Prevention grants. The program
provides grant funds to deliver technical assistance to small and medium-sized
businesses. The goal is to assist businesses and industries with identifying improved
environmental strategies and solutions for reducing waste at the source. The program
demonstrates that source reduction can be a cost-effective way of meeting or exceeding
102
-------
Categorical Grants
Federal and state regulatory requirements. In FY 2012, EPA is targeting a reduction of
1.1 billion pounds of hazardous materials, saving $847 million, conserving 27.8 billion
gallons of water, and reducing 6.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
Environmental Information Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests $10.2 million to continue the Environmental Information
Exchange Network (EN) grant program. These resources will support the development
and exchange of regulatory and non-regulatory data flows and expand data sharing
among partners. The request level will grow the EN by developing the necessary
capacity and infrastructure for tribes and territories, including new tools for EN partners
that make exchanging data faster and easier. Grant funding will support multi-partner
projects to plan, mentor and train EN partners and develop and exchange data.
Additionally, these resources will promote sharing and integration of
geographic/geospatial information and geospatial data standards with environmental
information, as the legacy methods for reporting data are replaced by the Network.
Sfafe and Tribal Underground Storage Tanks Program
The FY 2012 request includes $1.6 million for Underground Storage Tank (LIST) grants.
In FY 2012, EPA will make grants to states under Section 2007 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, available to support core program activities as well as the leak prevention
activities under Title XV, Subtitle B of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct).
In FY 2012, EPA will continue to focus attention on the need to bring all LIST systems
into compliance with release detection and release prevention requirements, and
implement the provisions of EPAct. States will continue to use the LIST categorical grant
funding to implement their leak prevention and detection programs. Specifically with
these LIST categorical grants, states will fund such activities as: Seeking state program
approval to operate the LIST program in lieu of the Federal program, approving specific
technologies to detect leaks from tanks, ensuring that tank owners and operators are
complying with notification and other requirements, ensuring equipment compatibility,
conducting inspections, implementing operator training, prohibiting delivery for non-
complying facilities, and requiring secondary containment or financial responsibility for
tank manufacturers and installers.
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests $103.4 million for Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
grants. Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance grants are used for the implementation
of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste program,
which includes permitting, authorization, waste minimization, enforcement, and
corrective action activities. In FY 2012, EPA expects to increase the number of
hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls to prevent releases by 100
facilities.
103
-------
Categorical Grants
By the end of FY 2012, EPA and the authorized states also will control human
exposures to contamination at 72 percent of the 2020 universe of 3,746 facilities that
may need cleanup under the RCRA Corrective Action Program. EPA also will control
migration of contaminated groundwater at 64 percent of these facilities, and complete
the construction of final remedies at 38 percent of these facilities.
Brownfields Grants
In FY 2012, EPA requests $49.5 million to continue the Brownfields grant program that
provides assistance to states and tribes to develop and enhance their state and Tribal
response programs. This funding will help states and tribes develop legislation,
regulations, procedures, and guidance, to establish or enhance the administrative and
legal structure of their response programs.
104
-------
SRF Obligations by State
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) Resources
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Resources
State-by-State distribution of Actual and Estimated Obligations
Fiscal Years 2010 to 2012 - Dollars in Thousands
The following tables show state-by-state distribution of resources for EPA's two
largest State and Tribal Grant Programs, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund
and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. These tables do not reflect total
resources that EPA provides to individual states.
105
-------
SRF Obligations by State
Infrastructure Assistance:
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF)
(Dollars in Thousands)
STATE
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Tribal Resources
Undistributed National Resources
TOTAL:
FY2010
ACT.
OBLIG.
$23,013.0
$12,317.0
$12,733.8
$24,336.3
$13,463.0
$150,463.0
$16,463.0
$342.0
$13,381.7
$9,117.4
$69,471.0
$34,797.0
$1,565.4
$5,223.5
$10,103.0
$93,390.9
$49,441.4
$279.0
$186.0
$262.0
$7,682.1
$15,932.0
$49,777.0
$69,876.0
$885.0
$37,827.0
$18,542.0
$19,534.8
$10,103.0
$105.0
$13,377.3
$206.0
$84,102.0
$8,518.8
$227,170.0
$49,178.2
$100.0
$5,645.6
$386.9
$22,311.5
$23,289.0
$130,208.1
$0.0
$18,334.3
$213.9
$10,103.0
$29,897.0
$125,168.8
$10,844.0
$13,377.3
$100.0
$42,184.4
$35,791.0
$31,970.6
$556.0
$10,187.9
$29,032.2
$2,498.6
$1,695,365.7
FY2011
EST.
OBLIG.
$23,013.0
$12,317.0
$11,129.0
$13,901.0
$13,463.0
$147,193.0
$16,463.0
$25,213.0
$10,103.0
$10,103.0
$69,471.0
$34,797.0
$8,052.0
$15,940.0
$10,103.0
$93,080.0
$49,600.0
$27,854.0
$18,577.0
$26,194.0
$22,624.0
$15,932.0
$49,777.0
$69,876.0
$88,493.0
$37,827.0
$18,542.0
$57,054.0
$10,103.0
$10,527.0
$10,103.0
$20,567.0
$84,102.0
$10,103.0
$227,170.0
$37,144.0
$10,103.0
$5,172.0
$115,861.0
$16,627.0
$23,249.0
$81,524.0
$26,843.0
$13,819.0
$21,084.0
$10,103.0
$29,897.0
$94,067.0
$10,844.0
$10,103.0
$6,459.0
$42,119.0
$35,791.0
$32,083.0
$55,639.0
$10,103.0
$42,000.0
$0.0
$2,100,000.0
FY2012
EST.
OBLIG.
$16,985.0
$9,091.0
$8,229.0
$10,260.0
$9,937.0
$108,640.0
$12,151.0
$18,609.0
$7,457.0
$7,457.0
$51,275.0
$25,683.0
$5,955.0
$11,765.0
$7,457.0
$68,700.0
$36,608.0
$20,558.0
$13,711.0
$19,333.0
$16,699.0
$11,759.0
$36,739.0
$51,573.0
$65,315.0
$27,919.0
$13,686.0
$42,110.0
$7,457.0
$7,770.0
$7,457.0
$15,180.0
$62,074.0
$7,457.0
$167,662.0
$27,415.0
$7,457.0
$3,825.0
$85,514.0
$12,272.0
$17,160.0
$60,171.0
$19,812.0
$10,200.0
$15,562.0
$7,457.0
$22,066.0
$69,428.0
$8,004.0
$7,457.0
$4,776.0
$31,087.0
$26,416.0
$23,680.0
$41,066.0
$7,457.0
$31,000.0
$0.0
$1,550,000.0
Notes: Estimated Obligations are based on an annualized Continuing Resolution for FY 2011 and the FY 2012 President's Budget.
There is a discrepancy between the FY 2010 IA, KS, NE, MO, Tribal Resources, and Undistributed amounts and the
amounts in the Analytical Perspectives volume of the President's Budget.
106
-------
SRF Obligations by State
Infrastructure Assistance:
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF)
(Dollars in Thousands)
STATE
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands, U.S.
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Tribal Resources
Undistributed National Resources
TOTAL:
FY2010
ACT.
OBLIG.
$16,823.0
$21,719.0
$2,259.0
$33,057.8
$10,229.0
$128,102.1
$24,074.0
$8,146.0
$0.0
$16,132.2
$0.0
$32,071.0
$935.0
$8,146.0
$13,573.0
$51,040.0
$22,738.0
$10,148.0
$165.0
$0.0
$17,954.3
$13,573.0
$18,409.4
$25,303.0
$41,226.0
$23,219.1
$14,125.0
$15,816.0
$20,245.2
$13,573.0
$21,719.0
$8,146.0
$28,995.0
$5,265.3
$89,427.0
$27,414.0
$2,600.0
$6,652.0
$0.0
$17,170.5
$25,485.0
$45,528.3
$8,146.0
$8,146.0
$762.3
$13,573.0
$15,084.0
$86,254.0
$13,573.0
$8,146.0
$0.0
$23,008.0
$34,650.0
$21,269.0
$0.0
$13,573.0
$15,596.2
$499.8
$1,143,484.5
FY2011
EST.
OBLIG.
$16,823.0
$13,573.0
$2,057.0
$27,259.0
$20,539.0
$126,958.0
$24,074.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$44,316.0
$32,071.0
$5,138.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$51,230.0
$22,638.0
$23,169.0
$16,605.0
$19,592.0
$25,649.0
$13,573.0
$21,059.0
$25,303.0
$41,226.0
$22,776.0
$14,125.0
$26,234.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$28,995.0
$13,573.0
$89,427.0
$35,593.0
$13,573.0
$6,148.0
$43,610.0
$16,863.0
$13,573.0
$39,766.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$15,084.0
$86,254.0
$13,573.0
$13,573.0
$7,016.0
$23,008.0
$34,650.0
$13,573.0
$23,399.0
$13,573.0
$27,740.0
$2,000.0
$1,387,000.0
FY2012
EST.
OBLIG.
$12,001.0
$9,682.0
$1,467.0
$19,445.0
$14,652.0
$90,568.0
$17,173.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$31,613.0
$22,878.0
$3,665.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$36,545.0
$16,149.0
$16,528.0
$11,845.0
$13,976.0
$18,297.0
$9,682.0
$15,022.0
$18,050.0
$29,409.0
$16,247.0
$10,076.0
$18,714.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$20,684.0
$9,682.0
$63,793.0
$25,390.0
$9,682.0
$4,386.0
$31,109.0
$12,029.0
$9,682.0
$28,367.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$10,760.0
$61,530.0
$9,682.0
$9,682.0
$5,005.0
$16,413.0
$24,718.0
$9,682.0
$16,692.0
$9,682.0
$19,800.0
$2,000.0
$990,000.0
Notes: Estimated Obligations are based on an annualized Continuing Resolution for FY 2011 and the FY 2012 President's Budget.
There is a discrepancy between the FY 2010 IA, KS, NE, and MO amounts and the amounts in the Analytical Perspectives
volume of the President's Budget.
107
-------
108
-------
Infrastructure Financing
Infrastructure / STAG Project Financing
(Dollars in Thousands)
Type / Grant
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
State Revolving Funds
Mexico Border
Alaska Native Villages
Special Needs Projects
Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant
Program
Targeted Airshed Grants
Brownfields Projects
Specified Infrastructure Grants
Infrastructure Assistance Total
Hunter's Point, California
Total: Infrastructure Assistance +
Specified Infrastructure Grants for
Hunter's Point
FY2010
Enacted
$2,100,000
$1,387,000
$3,487,000
$17,000
$13,000
$30,000
$60,000
$20,000
$100,000
$156,777
$3,853,777
$8,000
$3,861,777
FY2011
Annualized
CR
$2,100,000
$1,387,000
$3,487,000
$17,000
$13,000
$30,000
$60,000
$20,000
$100,000
$156,777
$3,853,777
$8,000
$3,861,777
FY2012
PresBud
$1,550,000
$990,000
$2,540,000
$10,000
$10,000
$20,000
$0.0
$0.0
$99,041
$0.0
$2,659,041
$0
$2,659,041
Delta
FY12PB-
FY10EN
-$550,000
-$397,000
-$947,000
-$7,000
-$3,000
-$10,000
-$60,000
-$20,000
-$959
-$156,777
-$1,194,736
-$8,000
-$1,202,736
Note: FY2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY2010
Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
Infrastructure and Special Projects Funds
The 2012 President's Budget includes a total of $2.7 billion for EPA's Infrastructure
programs in the State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) account. This budget
continues funding for the SRFs at $2.5 billion, following unprecedented increases
provided in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010.
Infrastructure and targeted projects funding under the STAG appropriation provides
financial assistance to states, municipalities, interstates, and tribal governments to fund
a variety of drinking water, wastewater, air and Brownfields environmental projects.
109
-------
Infrastructure Financing
These funds help fulfill the federal government's commitment to help our state, tribal
and local partners obtain adequate funding to construct the facilities required to comply
with federal environmental requirements and ensure public health and revitalize
contaminated properties.
Providing STAG funds to capitalize State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs, EPA works
in partnership with the states to provide low-cost loans to municipalities for infrastructure
construction. All drinking water and wastewater projects are funded based on state
developed priority lists. Through SRF set-asides, grants are available to Indian tribes
and U.S. territories for infrastructure projects.
The resources included in this budget will enable the Agency, in conjunction with EPA's
state, local, and tribal partners, to achieve important goals for 2012, for example:
- 91 percent of the population served by community water systems will receive
drinking water meeting all health-based standards.
Capitalizing Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds
The Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs demonstrate a
true partnership between states, localities and the federal government. These
programs provide federal financial assistance to states, localities, and tribal
governments to protect the nation's water resources by providing funds for the
construction of drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities. The state revolving
funds are two important elements of the nation's substantial investment in sewage
treatment and drinking water systems, which provides Americans with significant
benefits in the form of reduced water pollution and safe drinking water.
EPA will continue to provide financial assistance for wastewater and other water
projects through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). CWSRF projects
include nonpoint source, estuary, stormwater, and sewer overflow projects. The
dramatic progress made in improving the quality of wastewater treatment since the
1970s is a national success. In 1972, only 84 million people were served by secondary
or advanced wastewater treatment facilities. As of 2008 (from most recent Clean
Watersheds Needs Survey), over 99 percent of community wastewater treatment
plants, serving 222.6 million people, use secondary treatment or better. Water
infrastructure projects supported by the program contribute to direct ecosystem
improvements by lowering the amount of nutrients and toxic pollutants in all types of
surface waters. While great progress has been made, many rivers, lakes and
ocean/coastal areas still suffer an enormous influx of pollutants after heavy rains. The
contaminants result in beach closures, infect fish and degrade the ability of the
watersheds to sustain a healthy ecosystem.
The FY 2012 request includes $1.55 billion in funding for the CWSRF. Approximately
$33 billion has been appropriated as of FY 2010 to capitalize the CWSRF. Total
CWSRF funding available for loans since 1988 through June 2008, reflecting loan
110
-------
Infrastructure Financing
repayments, state match dollars, and other funding sources, exceeds $84 billion. EPA
estimates that for every federal dollar contributed, more than two dollars are provided to
municipalities.
Since its inception in 1997, the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program
has made available $21.05 billion to finance 8,358 infrastructure improvement projects
nationwide, with an average of $1.77 made available to localities for every $1 of federal
funds invested. As of June 30, 2010, $12.4 billion in capitalization grants have been
awarded, amounting to loans/assistance of $20 billion. The DWSRF helps offset the
costs of ensuring safe drinking water supplies and assists small communities in meeting
their responsibilities.
For FY 2012, EPA requests not more than 30 percent of the CWSRF funds be made
available to each state to be used to provide additional subsidy to eligible recipients in
the form of forgiveness of principle, negative interest loans, or grants (or a combination
of these). This provision would only apply to the portion of the appropriation that
exceeds $1 billion. EPA is also requesting, to the extent there are sufficient eligible
project applications, that not less than 20 percent of a portion of a CWSRF capitalization
grant and 10 percent of a portion of a DWSRF grant be made available for projects, or
portion of projects, that include green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency
improvements or other environmentally innovative activities.
As part of the Administration's long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable
Water Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with states and communities to
enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity. Important to the technical
capacity will be enhancing alternatives analysis to expand "green infrastructure" options
and their multiple benefits. Future year budgets for the SRFs gradually adjust, taking
into account repayments, through 2016 with the goal of providing, on average, about 5
percent of water infrastructure spending annually. When coupled with increasing
repayments from loans made in past years by states, the annual funding will allow the
SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water and drinking water
infrastructure. Federal dollars provided through the SRFs will act as a catalyst for
efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable water
infrastructure. Overall, the Administration requests a combined $2.5 billion for the SRFs.
Set-Asides for Tribes and Territories: To improve public health and water quality on
tribal lands, the Agency is requesting increases to the tribal set asides in the CWSRF
and DWSRF from 1.5 percent to up to 2 percent. EPA also is requesting an increase to
the SRF set aside for territories from 0.25 percent to up to 1.5 percent for the CWSRF
and from 0.33 percent for the DWSRF to up to 1.5 percent. EPA is also requesting
transfer authority between the Clean Water Indian Set-Aside Grant and Drinking Water
Infrastructure Grants Tribal Set-Aside Program.
111
-------
Infrastructure Financing
Alaska Native Villages
The President's Budget provides $10 million for Alaska native villages for the
construction of wastewater and drinking water facilities to address serious sanitation
problems. EPA will continue to work with the Department of Health and Human
Services' Indian Health Service, the State of Alaska, the Alaska Native Tribal Health
Council, and local communities to provide needed financial and technical assistance.
Brownfields Projects
The President's Budget includes $99 million for Brownfields projects. With the FY 2012
request, EPA plans to focus resources on the Brownfields area-wide planning effort
which will fund approximately 20 area-wide planning projects, with a combination of
grant and technical assistance funding, at a maximum level of $350 thousand per
project. In addition EPA will fund an estimated 82 assessment cooperative agreements
and 96 direct cleanup cooperative agreements. EPA will also support cleanup of
approximately 45 sites contaminated by petroleum or petroleum products and award an
estimated $2.6 million in environmental job training grants. In FY 2012, the funding
provided is expected to result in the assessment of 1,000 Brownfields properties. Using
EPA grant dollars, the Brownfields grantees will leverage 5,000 cleanup and
redevelopment jobs and $900 million in cleanup and redevelopment funding.
The successful implementation of Brownfields Area-Wide Planning projects is one of
EPA's Priority Goals. In FY 2010, EPA set a Priority Goal to initiate 20 Brownfields
area-wide planning projects that will include community-level efforts to benefit under-
served and economically disadvantaged communities. The projects will allow those
communities to assess and address a single large or multiple brownfields properties
within their boundaries, thereby enabling redevelopment of brownfields properties on a
broader scale.
For the 23 community-level projects that were actually selected, EPA will provide
technical assistance, coordinate its water and air quality enforcement efforts, and work
with other federal agencies, states, tribes and local governments to implement
associated targeted environmental improvements identified in each community's area-
wide plan. This Priority Goal reflects emphasis on both environmental health and
protection and economic development and job creation through the redevelopment of
Brownfields properties, particularly in underserved and disadvantaged communities.
The Brownfields projects funding also supports participation in the Administration-wide
initiative, the America's Great Outdoors (AGO), by promoting the planning of urban
parks and greenways on once abandoned or scarred lands.
Mexico Border
The President's Budget includes a total of $10 million for water infrastructure projects
along the U.S.-Mexico Border. The goal of this program is to reduce environmental and
human health risks along the U.S.-Mexico Border. EPA's U.S.-Mexico Border program
112
-------
Infrastructure Financing
provides funds to support the planning, design and construction of high priority water
and wastewater treatment projects along the border. The Agency's goal is to provide
protection of people in the U.S.-Mexico border area from health risks by connecting
homes to potable water supply and wastewater collection and treatment systems.
113
-------
114
-------
Trust Funds
Trust Funds
(Dollars in Millions)
Trust Funds Program
Superfund
Inspector General (Transfers)
Research & Development
(Transfers)
Superfund Total
Base Realignment and
Closure3
LUST4
Trust Funds Total5:
FY2010
Enacted
Budget1
$ FTE
$1,270 3,018
$10 66
$27 110
$1,307 3,193
$0 65
$113 75
$1,420 3,344
FY2011
Annualized
CR1<2
$ FTE
$1,270 3,018
$10 66
$27 110
$1,307 3,193
$0 65
$113 75
$1,420 3,344
FY2012
President's
Budget1
$ FTE
$1,203 2,900
$10 66
$23 106
$1,236 3,072
$0 28
$112 64
$1,349 3,187
Totals may not add due to rounding.
2 FY2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY2010 Enacted
levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
3 Funding for reimbursable FTE provided by the Department of Defense via an Interagency Agreement.
4 EPAct Grants for Prevention activities are included in the FY 2010 Enacted, FY 2011 Annualized CR,
and FY2012 President's Budget.
5 Trust Funds Total includes reimbursable FTE for Base Realignment and Closure as well as other
Superfund reimbursable FTE.
Superfund
In FY 2012, the President's Budget requests a total of $1,236 million in discretionary
budget authority and 3,072 FTE for Superfund. This funding level will address
environmental and public health risks resulting from releases or threatened releases of
hazardous substances associated with any emergency site, as well as the 13,556 active
Superfund National Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites. It also ensures that
responsible parties conduct cleanups, preserving federal dollars for sites where there
are no viable contributing parties. As of the end of FY 2010, 96 percent of the 1,627
sites on the NPL are either undergoing cleanup construction, are completed, or are
deleted.
Of the total funding requested for Superfund, $811 million and 1,372 FTE are for
Superfund cleanups. The Agency's Superfund remedial and removal programs address
public health and environmental threats from uncontrolled releases of hazardous
substances. The Agency expects to demonstrate significant progress in reducing risks
115
-------
Trust Funds
to human health and the environment. In FY 2012, EPA and its partners anticipate
completing construction activities at 22 Superfund NPL sites to achieve the overall goal
of 1,145 total construction completions by the end of FY 2012.
The Agency works with several Federal agencies that provide essential services in
areas where the Agency does not possess the specialized expertise. In FY 2012, other
Federal agencies, including the United States Coast Guard, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, and the Department of the Interior, will provide support to
the Agency for Superfund cleanups.
Of the total funding requested, $193 million and 1,037 FTE are for Superfund
enforcement related activities. One of the Superfund program's primary goals is to have
responsible parties pay for and conduct cleanups at abandoned or uncontrolled
hazardous waste sites. The Agency focuses on maximizing all aspects of Potentially
Responsible Party (PRP) participation; including reaching a settlement with or taking an
enforcement action by the time of a Remedial Action start at 99 percent of non-Federal
Facility Superfund sites.
CERCLA authorizes the Agency to retain and use funds received pursuant to an
agreement with a PRP to carry out the agreement. EPA retains such funds in special
accounts, which are sub-accounts in EPA's Superfund Trust Fund. EPA uses special
account funds to finance site-specific CERCLA response actions at the site for which
the account was established. Through the use of special accounts, EPA pursues its
"enforcement first" policy - ensuring responsible parties pay for cleanup - so that
appropriated resources from the Superfund Trust Fund are conserved for sites where
no viable or liable PRPs have been identified. Both special account resources and
appropriated resources are critical to the Superfund program.
The FY 2012 President's Budget also includes resources supporting Agency-wide
resource management and control functions. This includes essential infrastructure,
contract and grant administration, and financial accounting and other fiscal operations.
In addition, the Agency provides funds for Superfund program research and for auditing.
The President's Budget requests $23 million and 106 FTE to be transferred to Research
and Development. Research will enable EPA's Superfund program to accelerate
scientifically defensible and cost-effective decisions for cleanup at complex
contaminated Superfund sites. The Superfund research program is driven by program
office needs to reduce the cost of cleaning up Superfund sites, improve the efficiency of
characterizing and remediating sites, and reduce the scientific uncertainties for
improved decision-making at Superfund sites. The President's Budget also requests
$10 million and 66 FTE to be transferred to the Inspector General for program auditing.
There are still sites where no viable PRP has been identified and many activities that
EPA performs that are not otherwise reimbursed. For this reason, the FY 2012 Budget
supports reinstatement of the Superfund tax. The Superfund tax on petroleum,
chemical feedstock and corporate environmental income expired in 1995. Since the
116
-------
Trust Funds
expiration of Superfund tax, Superfund program funding (the "Superfund appropriation")
has been largely financed from General Revenue transfers to the Superfund Trust
Fund, thus burdening the general public with the costs of cleaning up hazardous waste
sites. Reinstating the Superfund taxes would provide a stable, dedicated source of
revenue for the Superfund Trust Fund and restore the historic nexus that parties who
benefit from the manufacture and sale of substances found in hazardous waste sites
contribute to the cost of cleanup. The reinstated Superfund taxes are estimated to
generate a revenue level of approximately $1.6 billion beginning in January 2012 to
more than $2.6 billion annually by 2021. Total tax revenue over the period 2012 to 2021
is predicted to be $23.5 billion. The revenues will be placed in the Superfund Trust Fund
and would be available for appropriation from Congress to support the assessment and
cleanup of the Nation's highest risk sites within the Superfund program.
Base Realignment and Closure Act
The FY 2012 President's Budget requests 28 reimbursable FTE to conduct the Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAG) program (BRAG I-IV). EPA's participation in the first
four rounds of BRAG has been funded by an interagency agreement which expires on
September 30, 2011. Since 1993, EPA has worked with the Department of Defense
(DOD) and state environmental programs to make property environmentally acceptable
for transfer, while protecting human health and the environment at realigning or closing
military installations. Between 1988 and 2005, over 500 major military installations
representing the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Defense Logistics Agency have been
slated for realignment or closure. Under the first four rounds of BRAG (BRAG I-IV), 107
of those sites were identified as requiring accelerated cleanup. EPA has participated in
the acceleration process of the first four rounds of BRAG. The accelerated cleanup
process strives to make parcels available for reuse as quickly as possible, by transfer of
uncontaminated or remediated parcels, lease of contaminated parcels where cleanup is
underway, or "early transfer" of contaminated property undergoing cleanup. Seventy-
two Federal facilities currently listed on the NPL were identified under the fifth round of
BRAG (BRAG V) as closing, realigning, or gaining personnel.
The FY 2012 request does not include support for BRAC-related services to DOD at
BRAG V facilities. If EPA services are required at levels above its base for BRAG V
installations, the Agency will require reimbursement from DOD for the costs the Agency
incurs to provide those additional services.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
The FY 2012 President's Budget requests $112 million and 64 FTE for the Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program. The Agency, working with states and
tribes, addresses public health and environmental threats from releases through
prevention and cleanup activities. As required by law (42 U.S.C. 6991 c(f)), not less
than 80 percent of LUST appropriated funds will be used in cooperative agreements for
states and tribes to carry out specific purposes. EPA will continue to work with the
states to achieve more cleanups, and reduce the backlog of over 93,000 cleanups not
yet completed. Between 1986 and 2010, the LUST program addressed 81 percent (or
117
-------
Trust Funds
401,874) of all reported releases. In FY 2012, working with state partners the LUST
program will strive to achieve 12,400 cleanups, including 42 cleanups in Indian Country,
that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration.
The LUST Trust Fund financing tax was most recently reauthorized in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 and unless reauthorized the tax will expire on September 30, 2011. The FY
2012 Budget supports the "polluter pays" principle and proposes to continue the LUST
Trust Fund financing tax which provides more than $180 million in tax receipts to the
Trust Fund annually. While tank owners and operators are liable for the cost of
cleanups at sites for which they have responsibility, EPA and State regulatory agencies
are not always able to identify responsible parties and sometimes responsible parties
are no longer financially viable or have a limited ability to pay. In those cases, the best
option is to distribute the cost of the cleanup among fuel users through the targeted fuel
tax, which would be available for appropriation from Congress to support the prevention
and cleanup of sites within the LUST program. Annually, the Trust Fund receives more
than $180 million in tax receipts.
118
-------
Acronyms
Environmental Protection Agency
List of Acronyms
AA Assistant Administrator
ACE/ITDS Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System
ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution
ARA Assistant Regional Administrator
ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
B&F Buildings and Facilities
CAA Clean Air Act
CAFO Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule
CAP Clean Air Partnership Fund
CARE Community Action for a Renewed Environment
CBEP Community-Based Environmental Protection
CBP Customs and Border Protection
CCAP Climate Change Action Plan
CCS Carbon Capture and Storage
CCTI Climate Change Technology Initiative
CEIS Center for Environmental Information and Statistics
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CG Categorical Grant
CSI Common Sense Initiative
CSO Combined Sewer Overflows
CWA Clean Water Act
CWAP Clean Water Action Plan
DBP Disinfection Byproducts
DFAS Defense Finance and Accounting System
DfE Design for the Environment
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EJ Environmental Justice
ELP Environmental Leadership Project
EN Enacted (Budget)
EPAct Energy Policy Act of 2005
EPCRA Emergency Preparedness and Community Right-to-Know Act
EPM Environmental Programs and Management
ERRS Emergency Rapid Response Services
ESC Executive Steering Committee
ETI Environmental Technology Initiative
ETV Environmental Technology Verification
FAN Fixed Account Numbers
FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
FCO Funds Certifying Officer
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
FLC Federal Leadership Committee
FMFIA Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act
FQPA Food Quality Protection Act
FSMP Financial System Modernization Project
FTE Full-Time Equivalent
119
-------
Acronyms
GAPG General Assistance Program Grants
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GLRI Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act
HPPG High Priority Performance Goals
HPV High Production Volume
HS Homeland Security
HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
HWIR Hazardous Waste Identification Media and Process Rules
IAG I nteragency Agreements
ICR Information Collection Rule
IFMS Integrated Financial Management System
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IRM Information Resource Management
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
ITMRA Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1995-AKA Clinger/Cohen Act
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
M&O Management and Oversight
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MTM Mountaintop Mining
NAAQs National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement
NAPA National Academy of Public Administration
NAS National Academy of Sciences
NATA National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment
NCDC National Clean Diesel Campaign
NDPD National Data Processing Division
NEP National Estuary Program
NEPPS National Environmental Performance Partnership System
NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NIPP National Infrastructure Protection Plan
NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
NOA New Obligation Authority
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPDWRs National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
NPL National Priority List
NPM National Program Manager
NPR National Performance Review
NPS Nonpoint Source
OA Office of the Administrator
OAM Office of Acquisition Management
OAR Office of Air and Radiation
OARM Office of Administration and Resources Management
OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer
OCHP Office of Children's Health Protection
OCSPP Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OEI Office of Environmental Information
OERR Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
OFA Other Federal Agencies
120
-------
Acronyms
OFPP Office of Federal Procurement Policy
OGC Office of General Counsel
OIG Office of Inspector General
OITA Office of International and Tribal Affairs
OMTR Open Market Trading Rule
OPAA Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability
ORD Office of Research and Development
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
OTAG Ozone Transport Advisory Group
OW Office of Water
PB President's Budget
PBTs Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics
PC&B Personnel, Compensation and Benefits
PM Particulate Matter
PNGV Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles
POTWs Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PPG Performance Partnership Grants
PRC Program Results Code
PRIA Pesticide Registration Improvement Act
PRIRA Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act
PWSS Public Water System Supervision
RC Responsibility Center
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
R&IE Radiation and Indoor Environments National Laboratory
RMP Risk Management Plan
RPIO Responsible Planning Implementation Office
RR Reprogramming Request
RRP Renovation, Repair and Painting
RWTA Rural Water Technical Assistance
S&T Science and Technology
SALC Sub-allocation (level)
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizations Act of 1986
SBO Senior Budget Officer
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System
SITE Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
SLC Senior Leadership Council
SRF State Revolving Fund
SRO Senior Resource Official
STAG State and Tribal Assistance Grants
STORS Sludge-to-Oil-Reactor
SWP Source Water Protection
SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TRI Toxic Release Inventory
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
UIC Underground Injection Control
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UST Underground Storage Tanks
121
-------
Acronyms
WCF Working Capital Fund
WIF Water Infrastructure Funds
WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Project
WSI Water Security Initiative
122
-------
-------
------- |