1 

FY 2014

June 12, 2013 

Publication Number 

305R13001

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

National Program Manager Guidance 

 
2 

Table of Contents

I. Agency Overview to the FY 2014 NPM Guidance...................................1 

II. OECA’s Introduction.........................................................................1 

III. National Areas of Focus..................................................................3 

This section discusses OECA’s national enforcement priorities for FY 2014: 

1. Implementing Clean Air Act National Enforcement Initiatives.........................................3

2. Implementing Clean Water Act National Enforcement Initiatives......................................4 

3. Assuring Safe Drinking Water..............................................................................5 

4. Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations...............................................7 

5. Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with Environmental Laws.........................8 

6. Implementing the Clean Water Action Plan..............................................................8 

7. Advancing Next Generation Compliance...............................................................10

8. Strengthening State Performance and Oversight.......................................................12

IV. Program-Specific Guidance.............................................................14 

This section provides critical national direction on the following program areas: 

1. Environmental Justice.....................................................................................15 

2. Federal Facilities...........................................................................................16 

3. CWA NPDES Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement..............................18 

4. CWA Section 404 Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material...........................................21

5. CWA Section 311 Oil Pollution Act.....................................................................21 

6. SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program..............................................22 

7. CAA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement........................................23 

8. RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program..........................................................26 

9. RCRA Underground Storage Tank (UST) Subtitle I Program......................................28 

10. RCRA Corrective Action.................................................................................29 

11. TSCA Lead Risk Reduction Program...................................................................30

12. TSCA New and Existing Chemicals Program.........................................................31 

13. TSCA PCB Program......................................................................................32 

14. TSCA Asbestos Program/AHERA......................................................................34 

15. FIFRA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement......................................35 

16. FIFRA Imports.............................................................................................36 

17. FIFRA Supplemental Registrations.....................................................................37 

18. FIFRA Region-Specific Focus Area....................................................................38 

19. CERCLA....................................................................................................39

20. EPCRA 313 Toxics Release Inventory.................................................................41

21. EPCRA 304, 311/312 and CERCLA 103..............................................................42

22. Federal Activities..........................................................................................43

23. Criminal Enforcement Program.........................................................................44 

Appendix I: OECA’s FY 2014 NPM Guidance ACS Measures

Appendix II: OECA Explanation of Changes between FY 2013 and FY 2014 NPM Guidance

Appendix III: OECA Key Contacts
1 

I. Agency Overview to the FY 2014 NPM Guidance

The Overview to the National Program Manager (NPM) Guidances communicates important 

agency-wide information and should be reviewed in conjunction with each of the FY 2014 NPM 

Guidances as well as other applicable requirements. The Overview also includes relevant 

background information and the cross-program areas that are important to effective 

implementation of EPA’s environmental programs in FY 2014. Read the overview at: 

http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2014. 

II. OECA’s Introduction 

This National Program Manager Guidance applies to the Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance (OECA), all U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional enforcement 

programs, and states and federally-recognized Indian tribes (tribes) implementing EPA-approved 

inspection and enforcement programs. 1

 OECA coordinates with the regions, states and local 

agencies and consults with tribal governments as it designs, develops, implements and oversees 

national compliance and enforcement programs. Regional offices also work with states and local 

agencies and consult with tribes to implement and review these programs. 2 OECA’s National 

Program Manager (NPM) Guidance provides direction for fiscal year (FY) 2014. It identifies the 

national compliance and enforcement priorities for FY 2014, discusses national direction for all 

compliance assurance programs, identifies activities to be carried out by authorized programs, 

and describes how the EPA should work with states and tribes to ensure compliance with 

environmental laws. Once implemented, the priorities and activities described in the NPM 

Guidance serve to protect the Nation’s environment and public health and provide a level playing 

field for responsible businesses. Most of the work in the NPM Guidance is accomplished under 

the agency’s Goal 5 - “Enforcing Environmental Laws” in EPA’s Strategic Plan.3

 

The EPA’s national enforcement and compliance assurance program assures compliance with ten 

distinct federal environmental statutes using a variety of tools, including civil and criminal 

enforcement. These tools are used to achieve OECA’s overall national goals for: 

• Tough civil and criminal enforcement for violations that threaten communities and the 

environment. 

• Next Generation Compliance: achieve greater compliance and protection using advanced 

monitoring and information technologies.

 

1 When referring to states and tribes throughout this NPM guidance, OECA is referring to states and tribes 

authorized to implement federal programs. EPA implements programs in states and Indian country unless and until 

EPA approves the state or tribe to implement the inspection and enforcement program.

2 EPA consults with tribes consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes and 

Executive Order 13175.

3 The EPA Strategic Plan is currently being updated for FY 2014-2018 and will be available in February 2014 at the 

following website: http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan 
2 

• Strong EPA/State/Tribal environmental protection: work together toward shared 

environmental goals. 

To help achieve these enforcement goals, in FY 2014 OECA will focus on high priority work 

where significant environmental risk and noncompliance patterns are known to exist or where 

there are important opportunities to improve performance, as described in this guidance. This 

work includes: 

1. Implementing Clean Air Act National Enforcement Initiatives

2. Implementing Clean Water Act National Enforcement Initiatives

3. Assuring Safe Drinking Water 

4. Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations 

5. Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with Environmental Laws 

6. Implementing the Clean Water Action Plan

7. Advancing Next Generation Compliance, and

8. Strengthening State Performance and Oversight. 

As part of the FY 2014 work, OECA is investing in a new paradigm called Next Generation 

Compliance (Next Gen) to improve compliance and reduce pollution. Next Gen takes advantage 

of advances in pollution monitoring and information technologies, as well as what we have 

learned about what drives compliance, to tackle today’s compliance challenges. Enforcement 

will always be a central part of EPA’s work to assure compliance, but we can do more to protect 

public health and the environment, and to assure that compliant businesses do not have to 

compete with companies that don’t play by the rules. Next Gen will assist the EPA and states in 

our efforts to better address large regulated universes with approaches that go beyond traditional 

single facility inspections and enforcement. Advanced pollution monitoring technologies allow 

us to identify pollution issues, and can be used both by government and industry to find and fix 

pollution and violation problems. In many instances, Next Gen solutions can reduce regulatory 

burdens while improving compliance with environmental standards. The elements of Next Gen 

are: 1) doing more to design regulations and permits that are easier to implement and that will 

result in higher compliance and improved environmental outcomes; 2) taking advantage of 

advanced pollution monitoring; 3) increasing electronic reporting, for more accurate and timely 

information on pollution sources and reduced burden on states and regulated sources; 4) 

increased transparency about pollution and compliance information; and 5) innovative 

enforcement approaches. EPA and states are learning from measureable successes in compliance 

approaches, and working together to design the compliance programs of the future, which can 

improve compliance and reduce pollution even in a time of declining government resources. The 

EPA, states, tribes and other partner agencies are beginning to invest in this transformation 

together -- realizing both efficiencies and cost savings from a coordinated design while 

protecting public health and the environment. To further these efforts, in FY 2014, EPA will be 

increasing its outreach to, and collaboration with, states and tribes on Next Generation 

Compliance strategies.
3 

III. National Areas of Focus

Every three years, the EPA selects National Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs) to focus enforcement 

resources and expertise on serious pollution problems affecting communities. After reviewing 

input from federally recognized Indian tribes, states and other external stakeholders, we have 

decided to continue the current NEIs for another three years (FY 2014-2016). Although the 

initiatives have made substantial progress in addressing noncompliance within their respective 

sectors, more work remains to be done. This section discusses each of OECA’s FY 2014-2016 

NEIs, as well as other national priorities, and identifies critical supporting activities, 

responsibility for implementation, and associated measures for tracking. After strategies are 

developed for each of the FY 2014-2016 NEIs, summaries will be posted on EPA’s NEI website 

at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/initiatives/index.html, which also announces 

EPA’s selection of the FY 2014-2016 NEIs. 

1. Implementing Clean Air Act (CAA) National Enforcement Initiatives 

Description: The following is a discussion of work in 2 CAA-specific National Enforcement 

Initiative areas. 

Cutting Toxic Air Pollution that Affects Communities’ Health: 

In 1990, Congress identified hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), currently totaling 187, that present 

significant threats to human health and have adverse ecological impacts 

(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/188polls.html). The CAA and EPA’s regulations impose strict 

emission control requirements (known as “Maximum Achievable Control Technology” or 

“MACT”) for these pollutants, which are emitted by a wide range of industrial and commercial 

facilities. The EPA will target and reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants in three areas where 

the agency has determined there are high rates of noncompliance: (A) leak detection and repair; 

(B) reduction of the volume of waste gas to flares and improvements to flare combustion 

efficiency; and (C) excess emissions, including those associated with startup, shut down and 

malfunction. Through this Air Toxics Initiative, the EPA will undertake compliance monitoring 

and enforcement activities to maximize environmental and human health benefits, which is 

particularly important for disproportionately burdened communities. OECA will utilize 

innovative monitoring and evaluation techniques and partner with the EPA’s Office of Air and 

Radiation (OAR) and Office of Research and Development. OECA will also provide equipment 

and training to inspectors to enhance the effectiveness of on-site activities.

Reducing Widespread Air Pollution from the Largest Sources, Especially the Coal-fired 

Utility, Cement, Glass, and Acid Sectors: 

The New Source Review/Prevention of Significant Deterioration (NSR/PSD) requirements of the 

CAA require certain large industrial facilities to install state-of-the-art air pollution controls 

when they build new facilities or make “significant modifications” to existing facilities. 

However, many industries have not complied with these requirements, leading to excess 

emissions of air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. These 

pollutants can be carried long distances by the wind and can have significant adverse effects on 
4 

human health, including asthma, respiratory diseases and premature death. These effects may be 

particularly significant for communities overburdened by exposure to environmental risks and 

vulnerable populations, including children. In recent years, the EPA has made considerable 

progress in reducing excess pollution by bringing enforcement actions against coal-fired power 

plants, cement manufacturing facilities, sulfuric and nitric acid manufacturing facilities, and 

glass manufacturing facilities. However, work remains to be done to bring these sectors into 

compliance with the CAA and protect communities burdened with harmful air pollution. 

Activities: 

EPA regions will:

• Implement the strategy for the Air Toxics National Enforcement Initiative. 

• Implement the strategy for the National Enforcement Initiative on New Source Review – 

Coal Fired Electric Utilities, Cement, Glass, Sulfuric and Nitric Acid.

 

Measures: For the Air Toxics Initiative, see ACS measures PBS-ATX03 and ATX04. For the 

initiative addressing the largest sources, see ACS measures PBS-NSR01-NSR09. Both sets of 

measures are in Appendix I, pages 1-2. 

2. Implementing Clean Water Act (CWA) National Enforcement Initiatives

Description: The following is a discussion of work in 2 CWA-specific National Enforcement 

Initiative areas. 

Keeping Raw Sewage and Contaminated Stormwater Out of Our Nation’s Waters: The 

EPA will continue its enforcement focus on reducing discharges of raw sewage and 

contaminated stormwater into our nation’s rivers, streams and lakes. This National Enforcement 

Initiative focuses on reducing discharges from combined sewer overflows (CSOs), sanitary 

sewer overflows (SSOs), and municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) by obtaining 

cities’ commitments to implement timely, affordable solutions to these problems. In FY 2012, 

the EPA developed the Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach 

Framework, which is posted at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/integratedplans.cfm to provide further 

guidance on developing and implementing effective integrated planning solutions to municipal 

wastewater and stormwater management. This approach allows municipalities to prioritize CWA 

requirements in a manner that addresses the most pressing public health and environmental 

protection issues first, while maintaining existing regulatory standards. All or part of an 

integrated plan may be incorporated into the remedy of enforcement actions. These remedies 

may include expansion of collection and treatment system capacity and flow reduction measures 

including increased use of green infrastructure and other innovative approaches. The EPA is

committed to working with communities to incorporate green infrastructure, such as green roofs, 

rain gardens, and permeable pavement, into permitting and enforcement actions to reduce 

stormwater pollution and sewer overflows where applicable. Regions should consider and 

promote the opportunity to utilize green infrastructure controls in municipal enforcement actions. 

See information on green infrastructure at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm?program_id=298. 
5 

Preventing Animal Waste from Contaminating Surface and Ground Waters: 

Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are a subset of livestock and poultry animal 

feeding operations (AFOs) that meet the regulatory thresholds of number of animals for various 

animal types. The EPA’s goal is to take action to reduce animal waste pollution from livestock 

and poultry operations that impair our nation’s waters, threaten drinking water sources, and 

adversely impact vulnerable communities. EPA’s regulations require permit coverage for any 

CAFO that discharges manure, litter, or process wastewater into waters of the U.S. CAFOs that 

discharge to U.S. waters but do not have National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits are in violation of the CWA. The EPA will continue to focus federal 

enforcement investigations primarily on existing large and medium CAFOs identified as 

discharging without a permit to waters of the U.S., particularly in areas of concern due to

impacts from CAFO/AFO wastes. In addition, EPA’s resources will be used to assure that 

CAFOs that already have permits are in compliance with those permits. Each EPA region, in 

coordination with their states where appropriate, will consider a variety of factors to prioritize its 

CAFO activities. These factors include, but are not limited to, identifying watersheds or water 

bodies where CAFO/AFO wastes are negatively affecting surface water quality, proximity of 

CAFOs to drinking water sources and vulnerable communities, and status of NPDES-authorized

states’ CAFO programs.

Activities: 

EPA regions, coordinating with their states where appropriate, will: 

• Implement the strategy for the Municipal Infrastructure National Enforcement Initiative. 

• Identify appropriate opportunities for implementing EPA’s Integrated Municipal Stormwater 

and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework. 

• Implement the strategy for the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) National 

Enforcement Initiative. 

Measures: For the initiative addressing raw sewage and contaminated storm water, see ACS 

measures PBS M105-M108 in Appendix 1, page 2. For the CAFO initiative, see ACS measures 

PBS-CAF002, CAF007 and CAF008 in Appendix I, page 2. 

3. Assuring Safe Drinking Water

Description: The EPA’s focus on public water systems (PWS), including those in Indian 

country, protects the public from the potential acute and chronic health effects of drinking water 

that fails to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The EPA’s Enforcement 

Response Policy (ERP) 4 has the ultimate goal of returning non-compliant PWS to compliance. 

More specifically, the ERP provides that based on the identification and prioritization of noncompliant PWS, those PWS identified as a priority must return to compliance (RTC) or be issued 

a formal enforcement action within six months of being identified as a priority system. The 

Enforcement Targeting Tool (ETT) generates a score for each PWS with unresolved violations 

based upon the number, severity and length of violations. 

 

4 The ERP is available at http://www.epa.gov/enforcement/water/documents/policies/drinking_water_erp_2009.pdf
6 

A quick response to SDWA violations decreases the risks to public health and allows primacy 

agencies flexibility to use a variety of tools such as assistance and informal enforcement actions. 

Primacy agencies should be proactive in addressing violations to prevent systems from reaching 

an ETT score of 11 or greater. This approach is especially important in Indian country, as it 

allows for timely and appropriate consultation with the tribal government as soon as a violation 

is identified. It is also particularly important in responding to violations at small and mediumsized PWS which may require more assistance to return to compliance. Inaccurate and 

incomplete data result in incorrect and inconsistent ETT scores within and across states. The 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) in FY 2011 highlighted the seriousness of 

underreporting SDWA data and recommended action by the EPA to improve the quality of data 

reported by states.

5

 OECA continues to coordinate with and support the Office of Water (OW) to 

improve data quality. Regions and primacy agencies should also continue their efforts to improve 

the accuracy and timeliness of data reported to the EPA. Coordination between OW’s Office of 

Groundwater and Drinking Water and OECA will enable the leveraging of resources to help 

assure safe drinking water.

Activities: 

EPA regions will:

• Ensure that primacy agencies fulfill the enforcement conditions of their primacy agreements.

• Promote accurate, timely and complete reporting by each primacy agency, including the 

EPA. 

• Ensure that primacy agencies use the ETT and implement the ERP. 

• Collaborate with primacy agencies to ensure that the PWSs with the most serious violations 

are addressed and returned to compliance in a timely and appropriate manner, particularly 

where PWSs are in substantial noncompliance with state, territorial, or tribal enforcement 

orders.

• Using the quarterly ETT, hold in-depth regular discussions with primacy agencies regarding 

compliance and enforcement matters that include, but are not limited to, progress in 

returning systems to compliance, monitoring compliance progress on orders, number of 

systems addressed, number of systems in violation, and overall performance in implementing 

the ERP. 

• Apply the ERP in Indian country, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia. When serving as 

the primacy agency for Indian country, ensure the ERP timeline for RTC is accomplished 

while simultaneously implementing OECA’s Guidance on the Enforcement Principles 

Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001), which can be found at:

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf. Application of 

the guidance, which contains threshold criteria for EPA’s consideration of formal civil 

enforcement actions, including appropriate consultation and compliance assistance, should 

not result in a lesser degree of human health and environmental protection in Indian country 

than elsewhere in the United States and must address and resolve drinking water violations 

on a schedule consistent with the ERP.

 

5 The GAO report is available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/319780.pdf
7 

• Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of the EPA are trained and 

credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal 

EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct 

Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct 

an inventory of federal credentials which includes an annual physical possession check of 10 

percent of the federal credentials issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused 

credentials stock. 

• Perform the activities listed below under “State, territories and tribes with primacy” in 

circumstances where the EPA is the primacy agency. 

States, territories and tribes with primacy will:

• Fulfill the enforcement conditions of their primacy agreements.

• Use the ETT and implement the ERP to ensure that priority systems, within six months of 

having reached a score of 11, either return to compliance or receive formal enforcement 

actions that compel the systems to return to compliance in a timely fashion. 

• Work to reduce their backlog of systems that have already been at a score of 11 or higher for 

more than six months.

• Return to compliance or address violations at non-complying PWSs before they become 

priority systems with a focus on schools and daycares, as resources allow.

• Report compliance and enforcement data to ensure that it is entered into SDWIS in a 

complete, accurate and timely manner.

• Coordinate internally among enforcement programs in all media to protect drinking water 

sources.

Measures: See ACS measure SDWA02 in Appendix I, page 3. 

4. Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations

Description: The following is a discussion of work in this National Enforcement Initiative 

area. 

Mining and mineral processing facilities generate more toxic and hazardous waste than any other 

industrial sector, based on the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory. Many of these facilities have 

impacted surrounding communities and continue to pose high risk to human health and the 

environment. For example, over 120 mining and mineral processing sites are on the Superfund 

National Priorities List and more sites are being added every year, including operating facilities. 

The EPA has spent over $2.4 billion to address the human health and environmental threats to 

communities as a result of mining and mineral processing. In some cases, the EPA had to sample 

drinking water wells due to potential impacts to children in low income communities. At some 

sites, EPA’s inspections have found significant non-compliance with hazardous waste and other 

environmental laws. Some of the more serious cases required alternative drinking water supplies 

or removal of lead-contaminated soil from residential yards. In other cases, toxic spills into 

waterways from mining and mineral processing caused fish kills and impacted the livelihood of 

low income communities. The EPA will continue its enforcement initiative to bring these 

facilities into compliance with the law and protect the environment and nearby communities.
8 

Activities: 

EPA regions will:

• Implement the strategy for reducing pollution through the Mineral Processing National 

Enforcement Initiative. 

Measures: See ACS measure PBS-MNP05 in Appendix I, page 2. 

5. Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with Environmental Laws

Description: The following is a discussion of work in this National Enforcement Initiative 

area. 

Vast natural gas reserves, unlocked through technological advances in horizontal drilling and 

hydraulic fracturing, are a key part of the nation’s energy future. The full promise of this 

resource will be realized only if it is developed responsibly and the new technologies controlled 

in a manner that protects the nation’s air, water and land. For example, an unprecedented 

acceleration of natural gas development has led to a significant rise in air pollution throughout 

the intermountain West. Geospatial analysis suggests that a similar rise in air pollution is 

possible elsewhere as unconventional gas development grows in other shale plays. Meanwhile, 

citizens continue to voice concern that drilling and hydraulic fracturing pose a risk to drinking 

water sources, either through improper well construction, wastewater management or otherwise. 

OECA initiated its Energy Extraction National Enforcement Initiative in FY 2011 to address 

these concerns and to take action where violations of environmental law lead to air and water 

impacts that pose a potential risk to human health. The EPA will continue to utilize a wide range 

of authorities, including the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water 

Act, among others, to ensure that natural gas development proceeds in a manner protective of 

human health.

Activities: 

EPA regions will:

• Implement the Strategy for the Land-Based Gas Extraction and Production National 

Enforcement Initiative.

Measures: See ACS measures PBS-EE01 and EE03 in Appendix I, pages 2-3. 

6. Implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA) Action Plan

Description: OECA, together with the EPA regions, the Office of Water and states with 

program authorization, continues to implement the CWA Action Plan issued in October 2009. 

The CWA Action Plan Steering Committee oversees implementation of the Action Plan through 

regular communication with and feedback to the EPA/state workgroups who are leading the 
9 

individual action items associated with the four fundamental changes. The changes are designed 

to revamp the NPDES permitting, compliance and enforcement program to better address 

today’s serious water quality problems. They are:

1. Switch from existing paper reporting to electronic reporting, resulting in increased efficiency 

and improved transparency of the NPDES program. 

2. Use Next Generation Compliance approaches to create a new paradigm in which regulations 

and permits improve compliance via public accountability, self-monitoring, self-certification, 

electronic reporting and/or other innovative methods. 

3. Address the most serious water pollution problems by re-tooling key NPDES permitting and 

enforcement practices, while continuing to vigorously enforce against serious violators. 

4. Conduct comprehensive and coordinated permitting, compliance, and enforcement programs 

to improve state and EPA performance in protecting and improving water quality. (Related 

activities are discussed under Strengthening State Performance and Oversight on pages 12-

13.) 

EPA will engage in appropriate consultation and coordination with tribes on the Clean Water 

Action Plan consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian 

Tribes.

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Prepare for implementation of the draft proposed NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule, 

including working to:

a. Actively market and implement the use of NetDMR by permittees for the electronic 

transfer of Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) to ICIS-NPDES, supported by the 

National Environmental Information Exchange Network (Exchange Network). The 

regions should implement EPA’s NPDES Electronic Reporting Tool (NeT) as general 

permits are added to this tool (e.g., oil and gas, and the multi-sector general permit);

b. Ensure their states are preparing for the implementation of the electronic reporting rule 

by adopting the use of EPA electronic reporting tools (NetDMR, NeT), or developing 

their own state e-reporting tools; and 

c. Coordinate closely with the Office of Compliance to individually evaluate their states’ 

readiness to implement the electronic reporting rule, including: Cross-Media Electronic 

Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) compliant electronic reporting tools compliant with 

EPA’s electronic reporting regulations; state system readiness; and level of participation 

using the state e-reporting tools (e.g., 90 percent participation by NPDES-regulated 

facilities). 

• Require electronic reporting, as appropriate, for all data required by enforcement actions, 

where appropriate and in accordance with national guidance.

• Provide relevant feedback to permitting offices regarding permit prioritization and 

modifications to consider when new permits are developed or a permit is renewed. Request 

that permit writers consider comments provided by inspectors and/or enforcement personnel 

in developing appropriate permit conditions. 

• Actively participate in CWA Action Plan projects including those to address effluent 

violations reported on Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) using new strategies and tools, 
10

such as expedited administrative enforcement actions and electronic compliance assistance. 

Consider innovative approaches to deal with more routine paperwork violations.

• As prescribed by the CWA Action Plan, OECA is leading an effort to draft new approaches 

for a revised CWA/NPDES Enforcement Management System (EMS) framework that 

supports the principles described in the 2009 CWA Action Plan. This framework will 

supersede the existing CWA/NPDES EMS that is used to prioritize violations for appropriate 

enforcement responses. Full implementation of the NPDES electronic reporting rule will be a 

critical element to implementing the new EMS. Both staff and managers in regions and states 

and tribes with program approval are encouraged to participate actively in this workgroup to 

develop this framework. 

• Include in targeting, monitoring, enforcement and state oversight the complete array of the 

NPDES regulated universe, going beyond the historic focus on traditional NPDES majors. 

Targeting tools, such as the DMR Pollutant Loading Tool, can be used to determine the 

source, location and amount of discharged pollutants. It currently includes a subset of nonmajor facilities, and can be found at: www.epa.gov/pollutantdischarges. 

State and EPA representatives on the CWA Action Plan Steering Committee and the various 

associated workgroups should:

• Attend and participate in regular meetings. 

• Assist in numerous aspects of workgroup responsibility including, as appropriate, drafting 

work products and deliverables and identifying appropriate timing for raising issues with the 

Steering Committee. 

• Represent states and regions, respectively, by engaging and providing meaningful input and 

direction on implementation issues. 

7. Advancing Next Generation Compliance 

Description: The health and environmental benefits envisioned by our statutes, regulations, 

and state and tribal programs are not being fully achieved. Although the available data is 

incomplete, high noncompliance is evident in much of the data we do have. State and federal 

resources for onsite compliance assistance, individual inspections, and enforcement actions are 

not adequate to address the large universe of regulated sources, especially the numerous small 

sources that are important contributors to environmental problems. Robust compliance 

monitoring and enforcement are critically important for identifying and addressing violations and 

promoting deterrence. While individual facility inspections and enforcement actions remain a 

critically important part of addressing noncompliance, this alone is not sufficient to achieve the 

improvements in compliance we need. Field operations and EPA regulations must consider 

emerging approaches and technology to be effective and efficient. Together with the program 

offices, regions, and states, OECA is developing and will implement a new paradigm called Next 

Generation Compliance, which takes advantage of advances in emissions monitoring and 

information technology. To implement Next Generation Compliance, as recommended by the 

General Accounting Office (GAO) (GAO-13-115; December 10, 2012), OECA will develop a 

Next Generation Compliance Strategic Plan by the end of FY 2013. OECA plans to pilot Next 

Generation Compliance training with the states and tribes in FY 2014 and beyond. In addition, 

OECA and the regions need to perform work in five areas: 
11

1. Design more effective regulations and permits that are easier to implement, with a 

goal of improved compliance and environmental outcomes. OECA is working with 

the program offices and regions to design more effective regulations and permits that 

include Next Generation Compliance tools and approaches for better compliance and 

environmental outcomes. 

2. Use and promote advanced emissions/pollutant detection technology so that 

regulated entities, the government, and the public can more easily see pollutant 

discharges, environmental conditions and noncompliance. This technology will make 

pollution that is currently “invisible,” “visible.” Industry can more effectively prevent 

and reduce pollution, and often make their operations more efficient, while government 

can better target significant pollution and noncompliance problems. Private sector 

development of monitoring technology that can be used by the public could empower 

citizens and encourage industry and government to reduce pollution. In addition, 

advanced monitoring technology, coupled with electronic reporting, will produce more 

complete universe data on regulated sources, their emissions and discharges, and 

environmental conditions. This data will support the development of new and improved 

compliance measures, allowing for more evidence-based approaches to compliance work 

and better assessment of compliance rates.

3. Shift toward electronic reporting by regulated entities so that we have more 

accurate, complete, and timely information on pollution sources, pollution, and 

compliance, saving time and money while improving effectiveness and public 

transparency. Electronic reporting should not be simply emailing files to the 

government. It is taking advantage of advances in IT to improve and streamline 

information submission, improving government while saving money. For example, an 

electronic “smart” form or web tool will be developed that guides the regulated entity 

through the process. Error prevention and two-way communication can be integrated into 

the reporting tool, allowing electronic compliance assistance and alerts on new 

regulations and helping to ensure that only necessary data is collected. 

4. Expand transparency by making the information we have today more accessible, and 

making new information obtained from advanced emissions monitoring and electronic 

reporting publicly available. This will empower communities to play an active role in 

compliance oversight and improve the performance of both the government and regulated 

entities. 

5. Develop and use innovative enforcement approaches to achieve more widespread 

compliance. We are developing new enforcement approaches that help to increase the 

effectiveness of our compliance work, such as greater use of fenceline monitoring and 

publication of pollution information, to both track pollution that is important to 

communities and to engage the community in monitoring compliance. We are also using 

advanced monitoring and electronic reporting in our enforcement investigations and 

settlements and making greater use of targeted deterrence approaches, and self and third 

party certification tools, to help drive better compliance and reduce pollution. 

Activities: 
12

EPA regions should:

• Participate on regulation development workgroups to provide real-world inspection, 

compliance monitoring, and enforcement knowledge and advocate for Next Generation 

Compliance approaches in the agency’s rules. 

• Actively participate in agency and OECA workgroups related to implementing Next

Generation Compliance components, such as electronic reporting, advanced monitoring and 

enforcement settlements.

• Identify and implement best practices to improve rule and permit implementation. Include 

Next Generation Compliance principles, tools, and approaches when issuing permits, 

reviewing permits, and training permit writers. 

• Work with OECA to ensure inspectors are trained in the effective use of advanced 

monitoring equipment.

• Incorporate Next Generation Compliance tools such as electronic reporting, advanced 

monitoring at the facility and fence-line, third party verification, and public accountability in 

enforcement settlements. 

• Identify and use innovative enforcement approaches. 

• Coordinate with OECA to establish advanced field compliance reporting systems that 

improve the quality of our inspections and allow us to electronically submit inspection 

reports. 

• Participate in the EPA-state collaboration to implement the new governance structure for EEnterprise, including promoting electronic reporting. 

States and tribes should: 

• Expand their understanding and use of Next Generation Compliance. 

• Identify and implement e-reporting ideas to expand transparency and improve environmental 

outcomes

8. Strengthening State Performance and Oversight 

Description: Our nation’s environmental laws are based on the principle of cooperative 

federalism under which the EPA and states work in partnership to protect human health and the 

environment. Most major federal environmental laws require the EPA to establish minimum, 

nationwide standards, and then allow the agency to delegate authority to implement these 

standards to the states. The EPA retains broad enforcement authority under federal law, and 

provides oversight of delegated state programs. 

As part of its oversight responsibilities, the EPA must clearly articulate expectations for state 

program performance and evaluate the states in a fair, consistent and equitable manner. This 

National Program Manager Guidance, working in conjunction with national enforcement policies 

and program grant agreements, is one place where these expectations are articulated. To evaluate 

state enforcement performance, states and the EPA worked in partnership to create the State 

Review Framework (SRF). The SRF is designed to ensure the EPA conducts oversight 

evaluations of state CWA, CAA and RCRA compliance and enforcement programs in a 

nationally consistent and efficient manner. Where regions directly implement the federal 

program in states that do not have authorized programs, OECA conducts the SRF review of the 

regions’ program using the same process and procedures as for all SRF reviews. A national 
13

approach to enforcement of the nation’s environmental laws assures that: (1) all states are treated 

equitably and held to the same standards as the EPA regions; (2) a level playing field exists 

across states and for regulated businesses; (3) the public has similar protection from impacts of 

pollution regardless of where they live or work; and (4) timely compliance with national 

environmental laws and regulations is widely achieved. 

In FY 2012, regions piloted the SRF Round 3 process which included integrated NPDES Permit 

Quality Reviews. Based on that experience, OECA, the EPA regions and states are currently 

exploring ways to improve SRF effectiveness while reducing the resources necessary to conduct 

reviews. OECA, regions and states are also reviewing a draft document entitled National 

Strategy for Improving Oversight of State Enforcement Performance. The Strategy is intended to 

clarify that an integral part of the SRF is a consistent national approach for dealing with 

significant state enforcement performance issues, once they have been identified. The draft 

describes three proposed sets of actions aimed at improving state enforcement performance to 

achieve the above-stated goals: (1) an escalation approach to problem-solving; (2) the regular 

and periodic State Review Framework evaluation process; and (3) transparency efforts. The draft 

Strategy likely will be revised before it becomes final. Consequently, some of the activities 

identified below may change or be modified, or different activities added, once the SRF process 

is revised and the Strategy is finalized. EPA will make available the final National Strategy for 

Improving Oversight of State Enforcement Performance.

Activities: 

EPA regions will:

• Conduct all Round 3 SRF reviews of state CAA, CWA, and RCRA enforcement programs 

scheduled for FY 2014, following Round 3 headquarters guidance, including integrated 

CWA permit and enforcement reviews. (These activities also support Implementing the 

Clean Water Act (CWA) Action Plan discussed on pages 8-10.) 

• Review MOAs as part of the CWA-NPDES integrated review process, using the OW/OECA 

criteria and checklist. Ensure identified issues are addressed as needed by the end of FY 

2017. 

• Enter complete draft and final SRF reports, including data metric analyses, file reviews, 

recommendations and state comments into the SRF Tracker. 

• Monitor progress of states in carrying out the recommendations and record progress quarterly 

in the SRF Tracker, including tracking results of integrated CWA reviews.

• Implement the National Strategy for Improving Oversight of State Enforcement 

Performance. 

• Use data verification and annual data metric analyses to inform regular discussions with 

states and to track performance.

• Focus oversight resources on the most pressing performance problems in states, working 

with them to demonstrably improve state performance. Where progress toward resolving 

significant state performance issues is not being made, regions should escalate their 

responses in accordance with OECA’s escalation strategy described in the National Strategy 

for Improving Oversight of State Enforcement Performance. 
14

• Ensure commitments to implement recommendations for program improvements are 

captured in appropriate negotiated PPAs, PPGs, categorical grant agreements or other written 

documents. 

• Per the June 22, 2010 memorandum from Cynthia Giles and Peter Silva “Interim Guidance to 

Strengthen Performance in the NPDES Program” and the October 22, 2010 memorandum 

from Lisa Lund and Jim Hanlon “Using the Results of NPDES Permit and Enforcement 

Reviews to Address Significant Issues,” regions should work with authorized states to 

conduct an integrated planning process that brings together different program components 

(e.g., standards, permitting and enforcement). In follow-up, convene routine and regular 

meetings between the EPA region and authorized state to discuss progress towards meeting 

annual permitting and enforcement commitments and how the state has been performing 

overall. 

• Review the number of SNCs/HPVs identified (and percent of universe) by state and the 

number (and percent) addressed in a timely and appropriate manner, using the Watch List as 

a discussion tool.

State and local agencies should:

• Work cooperatively with the EPA regions to conduct SRF reviews as scheduled.

• Implement recommendations within agreed upon time frames in the final SRF reports 

provided to the state or local agency. 

• Implement additional necessary work to resolve issues impeding effective implementation of 

their enforcement program.

• Where EPA regions’ review of state-EPA MOAs determines that MOAs might require 

revision, updating or supplementation, states should work cooperatively with the EPA 

regions to identify and complete appropriate actions. 

Measures: See ACS measure SRF01 in Appendix I, page 3. 

IV. Program-Specific Guidance 

This section provides critical national direction on specific program areas not addressed in the 

preceding section. For each program area, the guidance identifies critical supporting activities, 

responsibility for implementation and associated measures for tracking implementation. We 

recognize the tight budget situation faced throughout EPA at present. If resources do not allow 

for activities in the guidance to be implemented, then regional management should raise the 

specific activities for discussion with the appropriate OECA office director(s). Similarly, 

delegated or authorized state, tribal or local agencies that are facing resource challenges can raise 

specific activities for discussion with the appropriate senior regional manager(s) when 

developing their annual work plans with the EPA regions. This discussion is necessary to help 

ensure EPA consistency, as appropriate, in implementing critical activities across media 

programs and ensuring a level playing field nationally.
15

1. Environmental Justice

Description: In addition to being the National Program Manager for the agency’s 

Environmental Justice (EJ) Program, OECA oversees the implementation of environmental 

justice within the compliance and enforcement program. In its enforcement role, OECA ensures 

that facilities in communities disproportionately impacted by environmental problems are 

complying with the law. OECA aggressively applies regulatory tools to protect these 

communities, engages our regional, federal, state and tribal partners to meet community needs, 

and fosters community involvement in the EPA’s decision-making processes by making 

information available, as appropriate. 

OECA and all regions are implementing the strategies and activities outlined in Advancing 

Environmental Justice through Enforcement and Compliance, one of the five cross-cutting areas 

identified for agency-wide action in EPA’s Plan EJ 2014. OECA’s goals under this Plan are to 

fully integrate consideration of EJ concerns into the planning and implementation of program 

strategies, case targeting strategies, and development of remedies in enforcement actions to 

benefit overburdened communities. OECA has developed five strategies for Advancing 

Environmental Justice through Enforcement and Compliance: 

1. Advance EJ goals through selection and implementation of National Enforcement Initiatives.

2. Advance EJ goals through targeting and development of compliance and enforcement 

actions.

3. Enhance use of enforcement and compliance tools to advance EJ goals in regions’ 

geographic initiatives to address overburdened communities.

4. Seek appropriate remedies in enforcement actions to benefit vulnerable and overburdened 

communities and address EJ concerns. 

5. Enhance communication with affected communities and the public regarding EJ concerns 

and the distribution and benefits of enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

The link to OECA’s Plan EJ 2014 implementation plan is: 

http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/plan-ej/ce-initiatives.html

The EPA's Environmental Justice Small Grants Program supports and empowers communities 

working on solutions to local environmental and public health issues. Applicants must be 

incorporated non-profits, federally recognized tribal governments, or tribal organizations 

working to educate, empower and enable their communities to understand and address local 

environmental and public health issues. Additional information can be accessed at: 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/grants/ej-smgrants.html

Activities: 

Regions, together with states, tribes and other partners as appropriate, will:

• Implement the National Enforcement Initiatives, consistent with national strategies, to 

maximize environmental and human health benefits for overburdened communities.

• Specifically consider overburdened communities and potential disproportionate impacts to 

these communities, including those in Indian country, when selecting enforcement actions to 
16

address other important compliance problems. Targeting evaluations should always use the 

best available data and methods to achieve enforcement program objectives.

• Review civil enforcement cases to be initiated in FY 2014 for potential EJ concerns using the 

agency’s EJ SCREEN tool, and record the results of these reviews in ICIS, in accordance 

with the Technical Directive: Reviewing EPA Enforcement Cases for Potential 

Environmental Justice Concerns and Reporting Findings to the ICIS Data System. (Note: 

The EJ Technical Directive, piloted in FY 12, has been reviewed, updated and reissued 

effective April 1, 2013.) 

• Continue to develop area-wide initiatives: integrated (cross-program) strategies that focus on 

particular geographic areas with overburdened communities, and evaluate facility compliance 

in these areas. 

• Identify specific opportunities to work with other federal agencies, state and local 

governments, tribal governments, and/or the business community to leverage the benefits 

resulting from enforcement activities, both in particular cases and as part of area-wide 

initiatives. Document and share recommendations and best practices for taking action on 

these opportunities. 

• Where appropriate, design compliance and enforcement actions to gain the greatest possible 

environmental benefits in overburdened communities. For example, this could include use of 

multi-media inspections and/or process inspections to comprehensively address potential 

impacts from violations at a given facility.

• Consider activities to effectively reach large numbers of small sources with environmental 

violations that have significant local impacts on overburdened communities. 

• Identify and address EJ concerns as appropriate when consulting with tribal governments. 

• Enhance communication with communities with EJ concerns and the public about 

enforcement strategies and actions that may affect them, consistent with the confidentiality 

requirements needed to protect the integrity of the enforcement process. 

• Specifically provide opportunities for community input on EJ concerns and remedies to be 

sought in enforcement actions affecting communities through the EPA’s website, local 

information repositories, and other appropriate means. 

• Effectively communicate the benefits of our enforcement actions for vulnerable and 

overburdened communities, consistent with the internal memorandum entitled “Guidance on 

Characterizing and Communicating Environmental Justice Benefits Achieved in Enforcement 

Actions” (September 2011). 

Measures: See revised ACS measure EJ01in Appendix I, page 3. The new measure is the 

percentage of non-exempt cases brought by the EPA in areas determined by the EPA to have 

potential EJ concerns. [Note: While we are tracking this measure, there is no specific target 

number or trend we expect to achieve. EJ is one of many factors the Agency considers in 

bringing an enforcement action.] 

2. Federal Facilities

Description: The EPA’s compliance and enforcement program involves more than 30,000 

federal facilities and installations spread across nearly 30 percent of the nation’s territory, among 

which are some 10,000 currently regulated under the agency’s various statutes. The EPA holds 
17

these federal agencies accountable to the same standard of environmental compliance as other 

members of the regulatory community. This equal accountability is required by CERCLA, 

envisioned by most other statutes and affirmed under Presidential executive order. Federal 

agencies are now expected to go beyond compliance and serve as an example to others regarding 

environmental stewardship and management, as Presidential Executive Order No. 13514 on 

federal environmental sustainability makes clear. The EPA’s federal facilities enforcement and 

compliance programs are at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/federalfacilities/index.html. The 

agency’s primary focus in this sector has been on monitoring and enforcement, given the 

extensive compliance assistance now offered by others, especially at FedCenter, 

http://www.fedcenter.gov/, the sector’s on-line environmental stewardship and compliance 

assistance center sponsored by more than a dozen federal agencies. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Consult with Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO) on all federal facility 

enforcement actions. FFEO will focus its resources to make these consultations timely and 

effective, and bring clear value to these regional actions. 

• Utilize FFEO’s new inspection targeting capabilities for improved monitoring, especially of 

vulnerable communities associated with federal facilities.

• Target federal facilities, as appropriate, as part of implementing the EPA’s National 

Enforcement Initiatives and regional priorities. 

• Integrate OECA’s federal facility Integrated Strategies into the region’s inspection and 

enforcement efforts. These integrated strategies align enforcement, compliance, and 

stewardship activities for maximum effect and help achieve environmental and health 

benefits by addressing those problems that matter to communities. 

 Continue to implement Integrated Strategies dealing with storm water, RCRA corrective 

action sites, hazardous medical waste at federal facilities, disposal of excess federal 

property and vulnerable communities, where environmental justice issues are often most 

prevalent. 

 Continue to pursue exploratory Integrated Strategy areas identified in FY 2013, 

including at Government Owned/Contractor Operated/Government Owned/Privately 

Operated (GOCO/GOPO) facilities and other potential areas still under consideration by 

FFEO and the Regional Federal Facility Program Managers. 

• Continue to implement a 2011 enforcement settlement with the Department of the Interior’s 

Indian Affairs program for violations at its schools and water treatment plants across Indian 

country. 

• Sustain a vigorous enforcement program at federal facilities, especially focused on National 

Enforcement Initiatives, Integrated Strategy areas and regional priorities. 

 Include, where appropriate, environmental management system (EMS) improvements 

and Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) as part of enforcement action 

settlements.

• Collaborate with FFEO to identify and implement Next Generation Compliance opportunities 

to create more effective and efficient enforcement in this sector.
18

• Promote greater public awareness and consider greater public engagement through increased 

transparency of federal facility compliance activity, violations and enforcement actions, 

including press releases for enforcement actions. 

• Project at mid-year the number of formal: (1) federal facility enforcement case initiations; 

and (2) federal facility settlements for FY 2014. (These projections, which need not include 

Records of Decision at federal facility CERCLA sites, are not commitments but rather 

indicators of regional progress.) 

States and EPA regions should: 

• Continue to work to ensure adequate coverage of the federal facility sector through 

compliance monitoring and enforcement activity. Coordinate inspections or enforcement 

activity where appropriate. Regions should be a resource when questions of enforcement 

authorities arise, including questions of sovereign immunity. 

Measures: See ACS measure FED-FAC05 in Appendix I, page 4. Please note that the 

references to the UST Integrated Strategy and exploratory HCFCs/CFCs area have been deleted 

in the FY 2014 version of FED-FAC05. 

3. CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program 

for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement

Description: There are essential activities under the Clean Water Act NPDES program that 

help ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act (CWA) and associated regulations. 

Activities: 

Authorized states and tribes and EPA regions with direct implementation responsibilities (e.g., 

non-authorized states, federal facilities and Indian country) should: 

• Target serious sources of pollution and serious violations. Use appropriate tools, including 

those developed pursuant to the CWA Action Plan and the NPDES Compliance Monitoring 

Strategy (NPDES CMS) for the Core Program and Wet Weather Sources (issued October 17, 

2007) to target the most significant sources of pollutants affecting those water bodies and 

watersheds where compliance and enforcement tools will be effective in addressing the 

problem. Give priority to discharges that affect: (1) water bodies that are not meeting water 

quality standards; (2) drinking water sources; or (3) individual communities. Available tools 

include ambient monitoring data, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Pollutant Loading 

Tool (http://cfpub.epa.gov/dmr/), the Inspection Targeting Model (available to EPA and 

states at www.epa-otis.gov/otis/itm) and other GIS resources. 

• Develop annual compliance monitoring plans that take advantage of the flexibility available 

in the NPDES CMS. Provide FY 2014 CMS plans to OECA by December 31, 2013. 

• Implement activities that the EPA initiates as part of the evaluation of the 2007 NPDES CMS 

(final document anticipated during FY2013). 

• Implement the guidance resulting from the compliance monitoring national dialogue on what 

activities count as “compliance monitoring” under the 2007 NPDES CMS. 
19

• Ensure that all available data regarding violations are evaluated to determine the seriousness 

of the violation. Take appropriate enforcement responses, consistent with national policy, to 

address violations discovered. Ensure that civil enforcement actions are taken, where 

appropriate, to address serious violations contributing to a community’s water quality 

problems. 

• Ensure compliance with civil judicial consent decrees and administrative orders where 

applicable. 

• Implement targeted “real time” (quick response) enforcement activities to address CWA 

violations impacting communities’ waters where appropriate. 

• Ensure all required compliance and enforcement data are input or transmitted to the national 

data base in a timely manner consistent with EPA national policy and, if promulgated, the 

NPDES e-reporting rule. All other data related to compliance and enforcement should be 

tracked and managed, as appropriate, to allow the region or state to effectively manage their 

program. The EPA encourages states to expand their use of the national database to include 

compliance and enforcement data that pertains to the entire NPDES universe. 

• Continue implementation of integrated planning in accordance with EPA’s 2012 Integrated 

Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework, available at 

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/integrated_planning_framework.pdf. 

EPA regions should also: 

• Implement existing CWA compliance and enforcement strategies for specific geographic 

areas, as applicable, including the Chesapeake Bay Compliance and Enforcement Strategy 

and other region-specific initiatives.

• Conduct a sufficient number of oversight NPDES inspections to ensure the integrity and 

quality of each authorized state’s or tribe’s compliance monitoring program. 

• Ensure the full regulated universe of NPDES permittees is addressed in the state’s CMS plan, 

focusing on the most important sources and most serious noncompliance. 

• Track compliance monitoring activities and submit annual end of year (EOY) reports for 

each state and for regional direct implementation to OECA by December 31, 2014, or a later 

date if one is negotiated through the ACS process. EOY reports should account for all 

compliance monitoring activities conducted in the prior year in accordance with the NPDES 

CMS.

• Coordinate with their states to ensure that state partners who do not directly input data into 

ICIS-NPDES continue to use the National Environmental Information Exchange Network to 

report data to the EPA. [The Permit Compliance System (PCS) was archived in 2013.] 

• Utilize multi-sector general permit (MSGP) violation and benchmark data when available 

through EPA’s NPDES Electronic Reporting Tool (NeT) to support monitoring, targeting 

and enforcement in areas where the EPA has direct implementation authority.

• Routinely review all DMRs and non-compliance reports received for compliance with permit 

requirements where the region directly implements the program, including Indian country. 

• Work with OECA to identify and evaluate new priority areas that could become CWA 

enforcement initiatives in the future. Assist OECA in collecting and reviewing data about 

core program areas that warrant further review and consideration as national initiatives.

• With regard to regional direct implementation in Indian country, apply the NPDES CMS, 

applicable enforcement policies, and OECA’s Guidance on the Enforcement Principles 

Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001) 
20

(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf). The latter 

policy contains procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the civil 

compliance monitoring and enforcement context and contains threshold criteria for EPA’s 

consideration of formal civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria, including 

appropriate consultation and compliance assistance, should not result in a lesser degree of 

human health and environmental protection in Indian country than elsewhere in the United 

States.

• Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of the EPA are trained and 

credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal 

EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct 

Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct 

an inventory of federal credentials which includes an annual physical possession check of 10 

percent of the federal credentials issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused 

credentials stock. 

• Fully implement and oversee the pretreatment program:

 In non-authorized states, oversee all approved POTW pretreatment programs consistent 

with the NPDES CMS, including audits and inspections, and inspect Industrial Users 

(IUs) that discharge into POTWs without approved pretreatment programs. 

 In states authorized to implement the pretreatment program, evaluate the effectiveness of 

the state’s (i.e., the approval authority) program by inspecting and auditing POTWs with 

approved pretreatment programs (i.e., control authorities). In conjunction with POTW 

inspections, ensure that POTWs with control authority are carrying out their 

responsibilities, including annual inspections and sampling of all Significant Industrial 

Users (SIUs). 

 Where states are the control authority, assess each state program’s performance in 

conducting annual inspections and sampling of all SIUs. 

• Coordinate with the Center of Excellence for Biosolids to respond to work that may arise in 

this program. 

• Investigate the CWA compliance status of surface mining facilities within each region, 

including mountaintop removal mining operations. Evaluate the compliance status of such 

facilities with respect to NPDES permitting requirements and CWA section 404 permitting 

requirements. Take appropriate enforcement actions in response to CWA violations. 

• Oversee compliance with the Vessel General Permit and Small Vessel General Permit 

(anticipated to be in effect in FY 2013). As necessary, coordinate with Coast Guard in 

implementing the Vessel General Permit MOU and review of Coast Guard deficiency data.

Coordinate as necessary with Coast Guard sector offices on conducting joint inspections with 

Coast Guard.

• Continue implementing the Federal Facility Integrated Strategy on Stormwater.

• Support the agency’s Next Generation Compliance by promoting advanced monitoring and 

electronic reporting to improve compliance and enhance the ability to identify violations that 

may harm public health and/or the environment. Increase transparency and improve targeting 

for noncompliance. Develop innovative enforcement approaches and participate in agency 

rulemaking workgroups to ensure regulations are designed to promote compliance and are 

implementable. 
21

• Conduct SRF consistent with the schedule outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments. 

Provide recommendations and conduct follow-up as appropriate in accordance with national 

SRF guidance. 

• Implement specific actions designated in OECA’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, 

scheduled for completion in June 2013, to more fully integrate climate change adaptation 

activities into the compliance and enforcement program where appropriate.

• As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate programs areas that could become 

national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.

Measures: See ACS measure CWA07 in Appendix I, page 4. 

4. CWA Section 404 - Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material

Description: The compliance and enforcement activities related to CWA section 404 which 

should be implemented are described below. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Work with OECA in implementing the Section 404 Enforcement and Coordination Strategy.

• Coordinate, as appropriate, with other federal agencies [e.g., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and Fish and Wildlife Service] which have 

significant roles in wetlands protection through the use of MOUs/MOAs or other appropriate 

mechanisms.

• Meet with Corps Districts on an annual basis to establish regional priorities and communicate 

priorities to OECA.

• Review field level agreements with Corps Districts, and revise them to ensure consistency

with the Section 404 Enforcement and Coordination Strategy, as appropriate. 

• Utilize the Office of Water’s DARTER (Data on Aquatic Resources Tracking for Effective 

Regulation) system as well ICIS (Integrated Compliance Information System) in targeting 

efforts to identify potential repeat and flagrant violators. (ICIS continues to be the data base 

of record for tracking EPA information on CWA section 404 enforcement actions.)

• Develop methods to effectively leverage other program resources to more systematically 

identify potential serious Section 404 violations and take appropriate enforcement responses 

to address these violations. Share effective techniques with OECA for use in developing the 

national wetlands enforcement strategy.

• Utilize existing regional cross training opportunities as well as opportunities identified by 

OECA to cross-train inspectors and to train other federal and state agencies and stakeholders 

to identify CWA section 404 violations.

 

5. CWA Section 311 – Oil Pollution Act

Description: The compliance and enforcement activities which should be implemented to 

help ensure compliance with the Oil Pollution Act are described below. 
22

Activities: 

EPA regions should, where appropriate: 

• Participate in judicial enforcement cases to address spills from inter-state pipelines and 

others, such as production facilities, on a company-wide basis. Ensure these spill cases 

include company-wide injunctive relief requirements to prevent future spill violations at all 

facilities of the owner or operator. 

• Participate in judicial enforcement cases to address facility response plan (FRP) violations at 

facilities owned or operated by the same company. Ensure these FRP cases include companywide injunctive relief requirements to improve facility response planning and implementation 

at all facilities of the owner or operator. 

• Target and investigate facilities subject to the EPA spill prevention and facility response 

planning regulations, including offshore platforms within EPA jurisdiction, and take 

appropriate enforcement responses to address non-compliance with these regulatory 

requirements. 

• As necessary, target, investigate, and develop enforcement actions to address discharge 

violations (spills) wherever the violation occurs, whether or not the spill occurred at a facility 

subject to the EPA’s spill prevention or facility response planning regulations. 

• Conduct spill enforcement investigations to identify noncompliance and build cases for 

enforcement actions. 

• Whenever enforcement is pursued at facilities subject to EPA regulations, the case 

development staff should evaluate all potential violations of CWA Section 311 and 

underlying regulations and include claims in the enforcement case to address all 

noncompliance in these areas. Include penalties, injunctive relief and/or enforceable 

administrative obligations to prevent future violations from similar causes across all facilities 

of the same owner or operator. 

• Participate in OECA-led coordination and strategy meetings, as appropriate. 

6. SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program

Description: The EPA plans to focus UIC enforcement efforts on violations that pose the 

greatest threat to public health and shift away from enforcement work on more routine 

violations. Data generally show good compliance at most facilities that the EPA inspects, 

supporting a strategy of focusing our attention on the worst problems. Additionally, the agency 

will invest in new pollution detection and e-reporting technologies to more effectively address 

the large universe of pollution sources and empower communities. 

The EPA has delegated primacy for well classes I - V to 33 states and 3 territories; it shares 

responsibility in 7 states. The agency implements the UIC program for all well classes in 10 

states, 2 territories, the District of Columbia, and for most of Indian country. For Class VI wells, 

the EPA implements the program in all states, tribes, and territories.

Activities: 

EPA regions should:
23

• Directly implement the program where the EPA retains primacy. 

Authorized state and tribal programs should: 

• Implement the UIC program consistent with their specific authorization codified in 40 CFR 

Part 147. 

7. CAA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement

Description: The CAA compliance assurance and enforcement activities, described below, 

should be implemented to help ensure compliance with the CAA and implementing regulations. 

OECA and OAR, in coordination with the regions, will develop a national strategy to address 

noncompliance issues that arise in the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Program, as 

appropriate. OECA will also ensure that sources undertaking certain process changes or 

modifications that result in significant GHG emissions go through proper New Source Review 

permitting.

Activities: 

Delegated state, tribal and local agencies and EPA regions should:

• Implement programs in accordance with existing national compliance and enforcement 

policy and guidance [e.g., the CAA Stationary Source Compliance Monitoring Strategy 

(CMS), the CAA National Stack Testing Guidance, the Area Source Implementation 

Guidance, the Timely and Appropriate Enforcement Response to High Priority Violations 

(HPV Policy)6

, the asbestos NESHAP Demolition and Renovation Enforcement Strategy and 

the Guidance on Federally-Reportable Violations for Clean Air Act Stationary Sources7] to 

address air pollution problems that adversely affect impacted communities. 

• Identify and evaluate all violations, determine an appropriate response, address and 

ultimately resolve air violations in order to bring sources into compliance which includes 

taking timely and appropriate actions against facilities determined to have High Priority 

Violations. 

• Initiate civil and criminal enforcement actions, as appropriate, and whenever necessary to 

protect communities. 

• Ensure complete, accurate and timely compliance and enforcement data is reported into the 

Air Facility System (AFS) consistent with agency policies, the AFS Information Collection 

Request (ICR) and agreements incorporated in documents such as Memorandums of 

Understanding (MOUs), State Enforcement Agreements (SEAs), Performance Partnership 

Agreements (PPAs)/Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) or Section 105 grant 

agreements. This reporting effort includes the verification of data used by the State Review 

Framework (SRF) and made available to the public.

• Negotiate settlements and track compliance with consent decrees and administrative orders 

and take all necessary actions to ensure compliance with the terms of enforcement actions. 

• Implement the results of the CAA Compliance Monitoring National Dialogue. 

 

6 Policy is being revised in FY 2013.

7 Policy under discussion in FY 2013 and is likely to be revised.
24

• Continue work with EPA headquarters to provide input into the AFS modernization effort 

and participate in testing of the modernized AFS system prior to its production release.

• Participate in the Integrated Project Team (IPT) to develop and test the schema for 

exchanging CAA stationary source data from the state/local/tribal system to the Integrated 

Compliance Information System (ICIS). 

• Take action to prepare for data migration from AFS to ICIS, the modernized system. The 

legacy AFS will be merging with ICIS to establish a third component of the system, ICISAFS.

EPA regions should also: 

• Implement their component of the national strategy to enforce noncompliance issues that 

arise in the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Program, as appropriate. 

• Identify the most important air pollution problems and the most serious violations, using 

targeting tools and other information, including, but not limited to, the National Air Toxics 

Assessment (NATA) data, chemical toxicity data, non-attainment areas, and EJ SCREEN. 

Consider EJ information, tips/complaints, and community input. 

• Conduct evaluations as outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments, initiate enforcement 

actions to address non-compliance, and seek penalties, where appropriate, consistent with the 

CAA Civil Penalty Policy (including the Amendments) and in accordance with the 2008 

Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment Rule. 

• AFS will remain the data system of record for the national CAA compliance and enforcement 

program until it is modernized into ICIS. The regions should continue entering federal 

evaluations and enforcement actions, including penalties, into ICIS, as well as AFS.

• Continue any on-going investigations and initiate new ones, as appropriate. Report both 

initiated and completed investigations in AFS. Reported investigations should meet the 

definition in the CMS and minimum data requirements. 

• Review state implementation plan (SIP) submissions for enforceability and 

approve/disapprove as necessary. 

• Review Title V permits consistent with national guidance and ensure the delegated 

agencies/tribes are reviewing the certifications consistent with the CMS. Ensure that Title V 

permits do not shield sources subject to a pending or current CAA enforcement action or 

investigation, and that draft Title V permits include appropriate placeholder language for the 

applicable requirement at any affected units. Ensure that consent decree requirements, 

including required schedules of compliance, are incorporated into underlying federally 

enforceable non-Title V and Title V permits. 

• Perform CAA section 112(r) inspections at regulated facilities in the region, including high 

risk facilities meeting the agency’s definition in accordance with the 2011 “Guidance for 

Conducting Risk Management Program Inspections under Clean Air Act Section 112(r).” 

Inspections should also include an evaluation of compliance with applicable EPCRA and 

CERCLA requirements. Regional program managers may, after consultation with and 

approval by headquarters, alter the population and/or hazard index thresholds for their region 

in order to include additional facilities on the regional high-risk list. 

• Evaluate facilities that experience significant chemical accidents to determine compliance 

with CAA sections 112(r)(1) and (7) and pursue appropriate enforcement responses for 

violations. 

• Focus on identifying RMP non-filers and initiating enforcement in accordance with the June 
25

 30, 2010 memorandum titled ‘Identification of Facilities Subject to 40 CFR Part 68’. Settle 

 or litigate cases filed in years prior to FY 2014.

• Ensure compliance with environmental statutes in Indian country unless and until a tribe 

obtains primacy. With regard to regional direct implementation in Indian country, apply the 

various CAA compliance monitoring strategies, enforcement policies, and OECA’s

Guidance on the Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 

2001) (http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf),

which contains procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the civil 

compliance monitoring and enforcement context and contains threshold criteria for EPA’s 

consideration of formal civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria are not intended to, 

and should not result in a lesser degree of human health and environmental protection in 

Indian country than elsewhere in the United States.

• When appropriate, authorize state and tribal inspectors to conduct compliance evaluations on 

EPA’s behalf. Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of EPA are 

trained and credentialed per the Guidance for Issuing Federal EPA Inspector Credentials to 

Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct Inspections on Behalf of EPA

(2004). 

• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct an inventory of federal credentials 

which includes an annual physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials 

issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock. 

• In accordance with the HPV Policy, have frequent discussions with delegated agencies to 

ensure consistent implementation of the Policy, including consideration of the Watch List.

• Negotiate facility-specific CMS plans with all delegated agencies and ensure delegated 

agencies are aware of the flexibilities available within the CMS. Evaluate progress 

throughout the year and work with delegated agencies to revise such CMS plans as 

necessary. Work with headquarters to ensure that when delegated agencies use the 

flexibilities offered in the CMS to tailor their strategy to state/tribal/local specific 

circumstances, such use of flexibility is taken into account to accurately represent delegated 

agency performance in program reviews and to the public.

• Communicate to state, tribal and local agencies that they are expected to use the Exchange 

Network to report AFS data as soon as the system is in production and schema is available.

• Conduct a sufficient number of oversight inspections to ensure the integrity and quality of 

each authorized state’s or tribe’s compliance monitoring program.

• In follow-up to annual planning meetings with senior federal and state management, convene 

routine and regular (several times per year) meetings with senior state management to assess 

progress in how the state has been performing overall in its implementation of the program.

• Ensure facility performance data is accessible to the public consistent with agency policy and 

regulations. 

• Support the agency’s Next Generation Compliance by promoting advanced monitoring and 

electronic reporting to improve compliance and enhance the ability to identify violations that 

may harm public health and/or the environment. Increase transparency and improve targeting 

for noncompliance. Develop innovative enforcement approaches and participate in agency 

rulemaking workgroups to ensure regulations are designed to promote compliance and are 

implementable. 
26

• Conduct SRF consistent with the schedule outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments. 

Provide recommendations and conduct follow-up as appropriate in accordance with national 

SRF guidance.

• Implement specific actions designated in OECA’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, 

scheduled for completion in June 2013, to more fully integrate climate change adaptation 

activities into the compliance and enforcement program where appropriate.

• As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become 

national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.

Measures: See ACS measures CAA04 and CAA06 in Appendix I, page 5. 

8. RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program

Description: The critical compliance monitoring and enforcement activities for the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program are described 

below. 

Activities: 

Authorized states and EPA regions, in their oversight and direct implementation roles, including 

in Indian country, should:

• Address RCRA problems that matter to communities, especially tips and complaints, and 

identify and follow-up on the highest priority concerns.

• Meet statutory requirements to conduct a minimum number of thorough inspections annually 

including financial assurance requirements for Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities 

(TSDF), operated by state/local governments, and biennially for non-governmental TSDFs.

• Follow the RCRA Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS). Note: states may use the 

flexibilities described in the RCRA CMS for Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) and TSDFs. 

• Undertake timely and appropriate enforcement actions that produce significant 

environmental benefits. 

• Complete on-going work in the mining/mineral processing priority area, consistent with the 

national strategy, unless continued noncompliance is detected. 

• Consider the following focus areas as a high priority when developing strategies for targeting 

compliance assurance work and annual plans for respective activities in the regions:

 Surface Impoundments: hazardous waste in unlined surface impoundments. 

 Centralized Wastewater Treatment Facilities: mismanagement of hazardous wastes, 

and treatment and discharge of wastes without permits. 

 Zinc Hazardous Secondary Materials Recyclers: zinc fertilizer manufacturing that 

use hazardous waste; sham recycling and recycling. 

 Waste Analysis Plans at Commercial TSDFs: treatment and stabilization techniques 

and the sampling and analysis of hazardous waste treated to meet the Land Disposal 

Restriction (LDR) treatment standards for land disposal. 

 RCRA Corrective Action: facilities that have not made meaningful progress in 

achieving remedial objectives, and on financially marginal or bankrupt facilities. 
27

Monitor compliance with orders and permits, identify substantial noncompliance 

with such instruments, and take enforcement actions where appropriate. 

 Mercury from specific sources: sectors such as universal waste lamp handlers and 

recyclers. 

EPA regions should also: 

• Ensure that the most serious instances of noncompliance are addressed through planning with 

states, state oversight, regular (e.g. quarterly) meetings, targeted inspections and 

enforcement, and through direct implementation in states and Indian country. 

• Conduct a sufficient number of oversight inspections to ensure the integrity and quality of 

each state’s compliance monitoring program.

• Support the agency’s Next Generation Compliance by promoting advanced monitoring and 

electronic reporting to improve compliance and enhance the ability to identify violations that 

may harm public health and/or the environment. Increase transparency and improve targeting 

for noncompliance. Develop innovative enforcement approaches and participate in agency 

rulemaking workgroups to ensure regulations are designed to promote compliance and are 

implementable. 

• Conduct SRF consistent with the schedule outlined in the agreed-upon ACS commitments. 

Provide recommendations and conduct follow-up as appropriate in accordance with national 

SRF guidance. 

• Take enforcement action, consistent with national policy, where states are not addressing 

serious noncompliance or when federal enforcement may provide a more comprehensive 

response than an individual state response (for example on issues that involve multiple 

states). 

• Use electronic reporting tools as feasible when monitoring compliance with orders/permits.

• Screen for potential environmental justice concerns at RCRA facilities. 

• Support, and encourage states to support RCRA inspector training development. 

• Ensure regional direct implementation in states and Indian country includes applying the 

RCRA compliance monitoring strategies and enforcement policies and OECA’s Guidance on 

the Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001)

(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf), which contains 

procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the civil compliance 

monitoring and enforcement context and threshold criteria for EPA’s consideration of formal 

civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria should not result in a lesser degree of human 

health and environmental protection in Indian country than elsewhere in the United States. 

• Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of EPA are trained and 

credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal 

EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct 

Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, annually conduct 

an inventory of federal credentials which includes an annual physical possession check of 10 

percent of the federal credentials issued to state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused 

credentials stock. 

• Implement specific actions designated in OECA’s Climate Change Adaptation Plan, 

scheduled for completion in June 2013, to more fully integrate climate change adaptation 

activities into the compliance and enforcement program where appropriate.
28

• As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become 

national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.

Measures: See ACS measures RCRA02, RCRA02s and OSRE04 in Appendix I, pages 6-8. 

Measures RCRA 01, RCRA 01s, RCRA03 support the statutory and regulatory requirements and 

are listed on pages 5-7. 

9. RCRA Underground Storage Tank (UST) Subtitle I Program

Description: A major focus of the RCRA UST program is to maintain an enforcement 

presence concerning leak prevention, leak detection, corrective action, closure and financial 

responsibility violations. States have primary responsibility for determining facility compliance, 

ensuring adequate inspection coverage of the regulated universe, taking appropriate actions in 

response to non-compliance and playing a vital role in alerting the EPA to regulatory 

implementation problems. The agency will address violations that pose the greatest threat to 

health where a federal response is necessary and shift away from enforcement work on more 

routine UST violations. The EPA intends to maintain compliance monitoring and enforcement 

resources to directly implement the UST program in Indian country. The enforcement program 

will also continue to support the Office of Underground Storage Tanks in promulgating any UST 

regulations and help develop innovative approaches to promote and maintain compliance using 

next generation compliance and enforcement methods. 

Activities: 

EPA regions will focus on: 

• UST inspections that will produce the greatest environmental and human health benefits. 

Factors to consider in identifying facilities for inspection under the UST program include:

 Owners and operators of USTs located in Indian country; 

o Regional direct implementation in Indian country should take place pursuant to 

the applicable enforcement policies and OECA’s Guidance on the Enforcement 

Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001), which contains 

procedures for consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the civil 

compliance monitoring and enforcement context and threshold criteria for EPA’s 

consideration of formal civil enforcement actions. The threshold criteria should 

not result in a lesser degree of human health and environmental protection in 

Indian country than elsewhere in the United States.

o Inspections in Indian country will be conducted consistent with the Energy Policy 

Act 3 year inspection requirement.

 Owners and operators managing UST facilities in multiple states;

 Mid-level distributors operating multiple UST facilities;

 Problem non-compliers (i.e. repeat violators; owners/operators who fail to cooperate 

in an effort to return to compliance);

 Owners and operators of facilities with USTs that endanger sensitive ecosystems or

sources of drinking water; 

 Corporate, government-owned and federal central fueling facilities; and
29

 Owners and operators of UST facilities in areas with potential environmental justice

concerns. 

 Issuance of enforcement actions and assessment of penalties, as appropriate. Focus on 

developing large complex cases involving noncompliance on a corporate-wide basis or 

noncompliance in multi-state operations. Regions will consult with the states on use of 

delivery prohibition, when appropriate, to address significant noncompliance. This tool may 

not be an option for states and tribes that do not have delivery prohibition programs. 

10. RCRA Corrective Action

Description: RCRA corrective action is implemented by the EPA and 43 authorized states and 

territories. On April 27, 2010, OECA and OSWER jointly issued the “National Enforcement 

Strategy for Corrective Action” (NESCA). This strategy encourages the EPA and states to 

continue to work in partnership to achieve the 2020 Corrective Action goals and emphasizes the 

need for close communication and coordination between EPA and states to meet these goals. 

NESCA provides guidance to regions and states for targeting enforcement efforts and addressing 

special considerations that arise in the enforcement arena, such as ensuring enforceable 

requirements and deadlines in permits and orders are clearly identified, focusing on companies 

having financial difficulties, using CERCLA authorities, where appropriate, ensuring 

institutional controls are effective and enforceable and long-term stewardship requirements are 

met, and increasing the transparency and community involvement of enforcement efforts. OECA 

will continue to provide training to regions and states on how to review financial assurance 

submissions for compliance, and in particular, the financial test and corporate guarantee. To help 

achieve the RCRA Corrective Action program goals and ensure that meaningful progress is 

being made at facilities subject to corrective action, regions and authorized states should work 

closely together and continue implementing NESCA in FY 2014. On September 27, 2012, the 

EPA issued a NESCA assessment report that recommended the following future actions: 

increase emphasis on communication and coordination within the EPA and with state partners, 

explore opportunities for compliance monitoring, and increase the state role in corrective action 

compliance monitoring and enforcement (see http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/ 

publications/cleanup/rcra/nesca-assessment-2012.pdf). One of the next steps included in the 

September 27, 2012 NESCA assessment report is to explore the development of new compliance 

measures that are consistent with and measure progress toward the agency’s goals for the 2020 

universe. OECA is not proposing any such measures at this time. However, Region 5 is piloting 

corrective action compliance monitoring activity in FY 2014. 

Activities: 

Authorized states and regions should:

• Enhance coordination within your offices and amongst regulatory partners. When permits or 

orders are being developed, renewed or modified, coordinate to ensure that they contain clear 

schedules for corrective action and enforcement processes as appropriate.

• Emphasize compliance monitoring, including reviewing permits and orders to determine 

whether noncompliance with cleanup milestones exists, and taking appropriate action in 

cases of noncompliance.
30

• When establishing potential enforcement targets, regions are encouraged to focus attention 

on identifying and addressing disproportionate impacts on minority, low income, tribal and 

other vulnerable populations. 

Measures: See ACS measure HQ-VOL in Appendix I, page 7. The HQ ACS commitment for 

Volume of Contaminated Media Addressed (VCMA) has been adjusted from 300 to 275 million 

cubic yards per year. 

11. TSCA Lead Risk Reduction Program 

Description: The EPA regions and authorized states are expected to implement the National 

Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) for Lead Based Paint (LBP)8, which focuses on work 

being done to protect children’s health. For FY 2014, 90 percent of the region’s TSCA resources 

should focus on the lead compliance assurance program. However, up to 20 percent of these 

same resources may be shifted by the region to other Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

compliance assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The intent here is to provide 

flexibility for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique regional situations. 

Where regions choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a rationale and articulate 

how this flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the CMS.

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Focus primarily on compliance with the LBP Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule 

/Pre-Renovation Education (PRE) Rule. With regard to the regions’ LBP compliance efforts, 

regions should direct 95 percent of their efforts in the lead program towards RRP/PRE, and 

no more than 5 percent to new § 1018-only compliance. Regions should prioritize their 

activities to assure compliance with RRP work practices requirements. Regions may employ 

targeting that, while focusing on RRP/PRE, allows for concomitant compliance monitoring 

with other LBP rules (the § 1018 and § 402 Abatement rules), as appropriate. 

• Implement the program priorities and activities, including those set out in detail in the CMS, 

to balance the various types of inspections and other compliance assurance activities. The 

effective and efficient targeting of inspections, particularly work practice inspections, 

requires that the regions know the regulated universe, and prioritize the problems to be 

addressed. Regions should attempt to maximize their enforcement presence by focusing on 

larger violators, as appropriate. 

• Use the inspection targeting principles set forth in the CMS with a focus on monitoring 

contractors’ actual compliance with required work practices. Focus efforts in high-priority 

lead “hot spots” as described in the CMS [e.g., geographical areas with evidence or 

indicators of significant or wide-spread Elevated Blood Lead Levels (EBLLs)]. 

• Respond appropriately to tips and complaints and actively follow-up on the highest priorities. 

 

8 Please see Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act (September 16, 2011), 

including Appendix E – Lead-based Paint Program and Appendix F – Lead-based Paint Program 

Resources, at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf.
31

• Coordinate with OECA to bundle press activities related to cases from multiple regions, as 

appropriate. 

• Partner with state and local government code enforcement and building permit programs and 

state/local health departments to conduct joint inspections. 

• Partner with health departments and health care providers to identify lead hot spots and 

individual properties associated with EBLL children. 

• Initiate civil enforcement actions, consistent with national policy, to eliminate any regional 

inspection backlog and expeditiously bring facilities into compliance.

• Work with their LBP program to encourage states to seek authorization for the RRP program. 

• Conduct appropriate oversight of authorized state § 402 and § 406 programs. 

• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, conduct an annual inventory of federal credentials 

which includes a physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials issued to 

state inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock. 

• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database in a timely and 

accurate manner.

• As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become 

national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.

Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on pages 7-8. 

The Lead Based Paint component of ACS commitment TSCA 01OC will serve as OECA’s FY 

2014 measure of compliance work being done to protect children's health. 

12. TSCA New and Existing Chemicals Programs

Description: The TSCA New and Existing Chemicals Program is exclusively a federal 

program that provides for review of the toxicity of chemicals prior to their manufacture and 

importation to prevent unreasonable risk to human health and the environment and requires a 

series of notifications and submissions from regulated industry. For FY 2014, 90 percent of the 

region’s TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance assurance program. However, up 

to 20 percent of these same resources may be shifted by the region to other TSCA compliance 

assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The intent here is to provide flexibility 

for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique regional situations. Where regions 

choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a rationale and articulate how this 

flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) 

for the Toxic Substances Control Act. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Focus TSCA chemical program compliance activities on chemical manufacturing, 

distribution, processing, use, or disposal in emerging technologies and/or use of new 

chemicals. Focus monitoring and enforcement efforts on ensuring facility compliance with 

TSCA § 5 - new chemicals requirements such as Pre-manufacturing Notice (PMN); 

Significant New Use Rules (SNUR’s); Low Volume Exemptions (LVE’s), and on chemicals 
32

of concern including short chained and other chlorinated paraffins, fractions and other 

priority or Action Plan chemicals or targets. 

• Implement the Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(September 16, 2011) 9 including Appendix B which addresses New and Existing Chemicals.

• Obtain information through inspections and/or subpoena as appropriate. Increase the use of 

TSCA subpoenas for investigation of potential noncompliance. 

• Initiate civil enforcement actions, as appropriate, to bring facilities into compliance, 

consistent with national policy.

• Target existing chemical reporting and record keeping requirements such as TSCA § 8(c), (d) 

and (e) and the 2011 Chemical Data Reporting Rule. 

• Evaluate and prioritize tips and complaints and follow-up as appropriate. Targeting for future 

inspections based on credible leads from tips and complaints should also be considered. 

Regions implementing this program are also expected to follow-up on all referrals received 

from headquarters, states, tribes, and the public. Regions not implementing this program 

should refer tips and complaints to the Waste and Chemical Enforcement Division within the 

Office of Civil Enforcement.

• Strengthen program integrity through enhanced chemical data collection, reporting and 

coordination between headquarters and regions. This includes increasing coordination on 

targeting, setting program priorities and communicating best practices. 

• Work with OECA and OCSPP/OPPT to address new and existing chemicals compliance, but 

also work together to address those issues that are indicators of larger TSCA compliance 

problems that may negatively impact chemical safety (e.g., through enhancements to the 

Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System).

• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database in a timely and 

accurate manner.

Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on pages 7-8. 

13. TSCA PCB Program

 

Description: The TSCA PCB enforcement program is a federal only program. However, nine 

states through cooperative agreements inspect on behalf of the EPA. TSCA and EPA’s 

implementing regulations aim to minimize risks posed by the storage, handling, and disposal of 

PCBs and PCB-containing items. The EPA’s enforcement program will focus its PCB 

enforcement resources on nationally-significant situations involving the greatest threats to health. 

The EPA will pursue nationally-significant PCB civil and criminal violations that may present a 

significant risk to human health or the environment and maintain some field presence at EPAapproved commercial PCB storage and disposal facilities. For FY 2014, 90 percent of the 

region’s TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance assurance program. However, up 

to 20 percent of these same resources may be shifted by the region to other TSCA compliance 

assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The intent here is to provide flexibility 

for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique regional situations. Where regions 

 

9 The TSCA CMS, including Appendix B, can be found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf. 
33

choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a rationale and articulate how this 

flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) 

for the Toxic Substances Control Act. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Address nationally-significant PCB civil and criminal violations that may present a 

significant risk to human health or the environment, consistent with national policy. 

• Dependent on regional resources devoted to this program, focus inspections, case 

development and enforcement on the following areas of potential significant risk: 

1. PCB treatment, storage and/or disposal facilities targeted based on potential for releases, 

cumulative burden on EJ communities, or associated with approvals (permitting):

a. At facilities conducting approved PCB treatment, storage, disposal, or cleanups 

(the regions should inspect all approved commercial PCB treatment, storage, and 

disposal facilities at least once every three years); 

b. Areas where releases from unauthorized sources are going into sources of 

drinking water or other sensitive populations. 

2. Non-TSD Locations:

a. Natural gas pipelines;

b. Used oil facilities that receive and dilute PCB contaminated oil, and related 

possible distribution in commerce, contamination, decontamination, and disposal;

c. Follow-up where improperly or unmanifested PCB waste was turned away by 

disposal sites and was either returned to the generator or taken in by the storer/ 

disposer, as well as facilities that have the potential to receive unmanifested 

shipments;

d. Potential PCB-containing abandoned buildings, textile mills, and other facilities 

located in close proximity to residential communities assuming the existence and 

location of these facilities is known to the EPA region. 

3. Follow-up on tips/complaints that involve potential for illegal disposal and significant 

risk.

4. As appropriate, coordinating joint TSCA/RCRA PCB inspections at oil recyclers to 

efficiently use resources.

• Taking into account the aforementioned focus for the FY 2014 program, implement the 

Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act (September 16, 2011) 

including Appendix C – PCBs 10. 

• Monitor, evaluate and take action on compliance requirements/submittals/schedules under 

Consent Decrees and Consent Agreements.

• Ensure that any state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of EPA are trained and 

credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal 

EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct 

Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). 

 

10 The TSCA CMS, including Appendix C, can be found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf
34

• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, conduct an annual inventory of federal credentials 

which includes a physical possession check of 10 percent of any federal credentials issued to 

state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock. 

• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database in a timely and 

accurate manner.

States with EPA cooperative agreements should:

• Implement the agreed-upon work plan in their cooperative agreements. 

Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on pages 7-8. 

14. TSCA Asbestos Program/AHERA

Description: Since 1986, the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) amended 

TSCA to require schools to inspect their buildings for asbestos-containing materials and 

implement asbestos-management programs. The EPA will focus its efforts on addressing the 

most egregious violations of AHERA in order to protect human health and the environment. For 

FY 2014, 90 percent of the region’s TSCA resources should focus on the lead compliance 

assurance program. However, up to 20 percent of these same resources may be shifted by the 

region to other TSCA compliance assurance activities consistent with this NPM Guidance. The 

intent here is to provide flexibility for regional TSCA initiatives and to take into account unique 

regional situations. Where regions choose to exercise this flexibility they should provide a 

rationale and articulate how this flexibility is consistent (or why inconsistent) with the 

Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) for the Toxic Substances Control Act. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Address the most egregious violations of AHERA consistent with national policy. 

• For states and tribes that do not have a cooperative agreement with the EPA, taking into 

account regional resources devoted to this program, investigate and respond appropriately 

(including taking enforcement action as appropriate) within a reasonable amount of time to 

tips/complaints containing allegations that provide a reasonable basis to believe that a 

violation has occurred. 

• For states and tribes that do not have a cooperative agreement with the EPA, taking into 

account regional resources devoted to this program, consider conducting compliance 

inspections at state and local government facilities to monitor compliance with the asbestos 

worker protection requirements in states where state and local government employees are not 

protected by the OSHA Asbestos Standards.

• In states that have non-waiver status, review and evaluate a sampling of the state’s inspection 

reports for enforcement action.
35

• Taking into account the aforementioned focus for the FY 2014 program, implement the 

Compliance Monitoring Strategy for the Toxic Substances Control Act (September 16, 2011) 

including Appendix D – Asbestos 11. 

• Ensure that any state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of EPA are trained and 

credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal 

EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to Conduct 

Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). 

• Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, conduct an annual inventory of federal credentials 

which includes a physical possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials issued to 

state and tribal inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock. 

• Enter all federal inspection and enforcement cases into the national database in a timely and 

accurate manner.

Waiver and non-waiver states are expected to:

• Within a reasonable period of time, investigate and respond appropriately to any 

tips/complaints containing allegations that provide a reasonable basis to believe that a 

violation has occurred. 

• Conduct inspections in each state to assure equitable protection and ensure compliance with 

the TSCA asbestos regulations. 

• In waiver states, take appropriate enforcement action under state law. 

• In non-waiver states, submit completed inspection reports to the EPA region for review and 

enforcement action as appropriate, consistent with the state’s cooperative agreement. 

Consider conducting compliance inspections at state and local government facilities to 

monitor compliance with the asbestos worker protection requirements in states where state 

and local government employees are not protected by the OSHA Asbestos Standards.

Measures: See ACS measures TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC in Appendix I on pages 7-8. 

15. FIFRA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement

Description: The EPA will ensure compliance with and effective enforcement of FIFRA 

regulatory requirements. The EPA will generally prioritize its compliance monitoring activities 

based on risk to human health and the environment. The program should include a balance of 

compliance and enforcement activities covering: worker protection, pesticide registration and 

labeling, product efficacy (including enforcement follow-up of efficacy failures of antimicrobial 

products) and compositional integrity, producing establishment registration and reporting, import 

and export requirements, unreasonable adverse effects reporting, and other noncompliant 

pesticides. 

Activities: 

EPA regions, working with states and tribes, should: 

 

11 The TSCA CMS, including Appendix D can be found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/monitoring/tsca/tsca-cms.pdf
36

• Participate in the 3 FIFRA Focus Areas: a) Imports; b) Supplemental Registrations; and 

c) a Region Specific Area, discussed on page 38 of this NPM Guidance.

• Encourage state and tribal involvement in supporting these activities, as appropriate, by 

including relevant activities in their negotiated cooperative agreements.

• Convene routine and regular meetings between the region and state to discuss how the 

state has been performing overall in its implementation of the program. Evaluate 

appropriateness of state/tribal enforcement responses during grant reviews, with emphasis 

on case reviews of farm workers’ complaints and NPM Guidance focus areas.

• Focus oversight resources on the most pressing performance problems and work to 

demonstrably improve state performance. 

• Take enforcement, consistent with national policy, to address serious violations in the 

absence of appropriate state response.

• Negotiate, oversee implementation of and review state and tribal performance under 

pesticide enforcement cooperative agreements following existing policy and guidance. 

• Per the cooperative agreement guidance, encourage states and tribes to engage in 

compliance monitoring activities that support other pesticide program issues of interest, 

such as pollinator protection incident data collection and water contamination data 

collection in urban and agricultural settings. 

• Provide states and tribes targeting assistance, with emphasis on producer establishments.

• Ensure that state and tribal inspectors who inspect on behalf of EPA are trained and 

credentialed consistent with agency guidance, including the Guidance for Issuing Federal 

EPA Inspector Credentials to Authorize Employees of State/Tribal Governments to 

Conduct Inspections on Behalf of EPA (2004). Consistent with the EPA Order 3510, 

annually conduct an inventory of federal credentials which includes an annual physical 

possession check of 10 percent of the federal credentials issued to state and tribal 

inspectors and a count of unused credentials stock. 

• Apply the various FIFRA enforcement policies and OECA’s Guidance on the 

Enforcement Principles Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy (January 17, 2001) 

(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/policies/state/84indianpolicy.pdf) when doing 

direct implementation in Indian country to ensure adequate human health and 

environmental protection in Indian country as elsewhere in the United States.

• Ensure timely and accurate entry of state/tribal performance data into FTTS and federal 

inspection and enforcement data into ICIS. 

• As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become 

national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.

Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8. 

16. FIFRA Imports

Description: The EPA’s enforcement program addresses the illegal importation of 

unregistered or otherwise noncompliant pesticide products into the United States by bringing 

enforcement actions against importers and others and working with other governments, agencies 

and stakeholders to prevent and reduce risks of unsafe products entering our country, with 

special emphasis on enforcing against importers of high-risk unregistered pesticides. Illegal 
37

pesticide imports may present significant human health and environmental risks and have been 

linked to poisonings of children and pets, so interception before they enter the United States is 

critical. The EPA regions are the primary source of inspections and enforcement for this area. 

States may become involved through region-to-state referrals to monitor post-entry import 

compliance or states may encounter imported products during the course of other compliance 

monitoring inspections. Regions should make their states aware of EPA’s strong interest in 

import compliance and encourage collaboration with the EPA when situations warrant. FIFRA 

imports work helps to further the work of the Interagency Working Group on Import Safety 

established by Executive Order 13439 and the current "One U.S. Government at the Border" 

initiative. Currently, EPA staff manually review FIFRA Notices of Arrival (NOAs) for pesticide 

products and devices entering the U.S. and provide direction and guidance to Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) as to whether the product should be allowed to enter U.S. commerce. 

The planned transition to an automated processing system in FY 2014 [Automated Commercial 

Environment in the International Trade Data System (ACE/ITDS)] creates opportunities to 

reduce the investment in manual processing of NOAs. Once fully functional, ACE/ITDS will 

process the majority of NOAs, significantly reducing the need for manual review and approval 

by the EPA.

Activities: 

EPA regions should: 

• Monitor import compliance through inspections at:

 Entry ports, when appropriate. 

 Designated destination points (conducted after the imported products have been released 

by CBP and have entered into U.S. commerce, Foreign Trade Zones being used for 

storage, processing or packaging prior to release into U.S. commerce). 

• Focus on importers with a history of noncompliance or significant importation 

activity from countries frequently associated with noncompliant shipments.

• Screen NOAs for potential Confidential Statement of Formula discrepancies relating 

to source of active ingredient and countries of origin. Where potential discrepancies 

are noted, follow-up investigations may be warranted at U.S. registered agents for 

foreign producers and domestic producing establishments.

• Take enforcement actions, as appropriate, to ensure optimum deterrence effect and 

enforcement impact, including enforcement actions that address corporate-wide 

noncompliant behavior and high-risk unregistered pesticide products. 

Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8. 

17. FIFRA Supplemental Registrations

Description: Supplemental pesticide registrations are a continued source of concern for

regulators across the country. States, which conduct thousands of marketplace inspections each 

year, have raised concern over supplemental or “distributor products” labels, citing them as a 

major source of noncompliance. Supplemental registrations are distributor labels approved for 

marketing as a sub-registration to a registered pesticide. Although required to be consistent with 
38

the labels of the basic registered products, distributor product labels frequently deviate 

substantially from the EPA accepted labels. The EPA issues supplemental registrations for a 

wide range of pesticide products in every toxicity category, including agricultural chemicals, 

pesticides used for residential pest control, lawn and garden pesticides, as well as for 

disinfectants and other antimicrobial products. To address noncompliance in this focus area, the 

EPA will place emphasis on registrants with a large number of current supplemental registrations 

and registrants marketing high-risk Tox 1 and Restricted Use Pesticide (RUP) category 

distributor products, as well as unregistered, cancelled, or suspended pesticide products. The 

EPA will determine distributor product compliance by undertaking a comprehensive review of 

product labeling and product chemistry, when appropriate. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Conduct inspections as appropriate to monitor for label/labeling compliance, product 

composition and compliance with the provisions as described in 40 CFR § 152.132, 

including the restrictions on where and how a supplemental distributor pesticide may be 

produced and packaged. This should include review of any contract manufacturing 

agreement(s) that should be in place. States may wish to participate too, and can be a 

significant source of information about noncompliant distributor products by referring 

cases involving noncompliant distributor products and sample labels obtained as part of 

the state product registration process.

• Coordinate with the Office of Civil Enforcement’s Waste and Chemical Enforcement 

Division and other regions in developing corporate-wide cases. 

• Take enforcement actions, as appropriate, to ensure optimum deterrence and compliance 

impact. 

Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8. 

18. FIFRA Region-Specific Focus Area

Description: In FY 2014, regions will work with State Lead Agencies to address FIFRA 

enforcement issues of mutual EPA and state concern. Although enforcement priorities may 

differ, many EPA and state interests overlap, offering an opportunity for a collaborative effort to 

maximize results to address a particular problem. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Consult with states to identify their top enforcement priorities and focus on 

environmental or human health problems that advance both state and federal enforcement 

programs. Issues that may be appropriate for a coordinated enforcement focus area are 

listed below: 
39

 Fumigants/Fumigation: Fumigants are highly toxic pesticides that are very hazardous to 

handle and use. These products have a wide range of uses, including treatment of soil, 

residential structures, warehouses, transportation vehicles and grains or other agricultural 

commodities. Regions should work with their states to identify federal and state 

producing establishment inspection (PEI) opportunities, placing emphasis on compliance 

with the new soil fumigant labeling and use requirements and on fumigants frequently 

involved in exposure incidents (i.e., sulfuryl fluoride, methyl bromide, aluminum 

phosphide, zinc phosphide, metam-sodium and chloropicrin). 

 Worker Safety: Agricultural farm workers and pesticide applicators face a 

disproportionately high risk of pesticide exposure. Although most states have “primacy” 

to enforce pesticide use, including worker protection standards, regions should seek 

opportunities for federal cases to support state efforts. Where the EPA directly 

implements FIFRA, such as in Indian country, EPA regions monitor compliance and 

enforce pesticide use requirements, although tribes with cooperative enforcement 

agreements may conduct inspections under their own tribal codes. Regions are expected 

to place emphasis on farming activities that involve frequent use of highly toxic 

pesticides or significant worker exposure, such as fruit and vegetable production and onfarm grain and soil fumigation. 

 Retail Marketing: Retail marketers of pesticide products directly impact the consuming 

public. Regions should focus on national or regional retail chains operating multiple 

stores nationwide or in a multi-state area. Such stores often market similar products 

throughout their network of stores so that compliance issues can have corporate-wide 

implications. Alternatively, regions may elect to target major distributors who sell 

directly to specialized niche markets such as distributors that sell directly to hospitals, 

beauty salons and barber shops, funeral homes and restaurants. 

 Container/Containment: To ensure effective implementation of the container/ 

containment regulations, regions, states and tribes should monitor compliance with all 

aspects of the new rule. Focus on compliance with container design and labeling, residue 

removal and containment requirements for registrants, re-fillers, agricultural retailers, 

commercial applicators and custom blenders. State/tribal user inspections should focus on 

compliance with label directions for storage, cleaning and disposal of containers. 

Measures: See ACS measure FIFRA-FED1 in Appendix I, page 8. 

19. CERCLA

Description: EPA’s CERCLA Enforcement program protects communities by requiring 

responsible parties to conduct cleanups which helps preserve 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. The EPA identifies potentially responsible parties and 

negotiates cleanup agreements at hazardous waste sites and, where negotiations fail, either takes 

enforcement actions to require cleanup or expends Superfund appropriated dollars to clean up the 
40

sites. In some cases, the EPA takes both actions. When the EPA uses appropriated dollars, it 

takes action against any viable responsible parties to recover cleanup costs. OECA has developed 

a plan outlining how resources could be reduced while maximizing potentially responsible party 

(PRP) funded cleanups and protecting human health and the environment. This plan reflects 

Superfund enforcement reductions while striving to maintain PRP-lead response actions and 

protect human health and the environment. OECA believes that savings can be achieved by 

focusing Superfund enforcement resources on the highest-priority sites and those enforcement 

activities that achieve the greatest return on investment; thus, OECA is asking regions to exert 

nominal efforts to collect costs where there are unaddressed past costs less than $500,000, and to 

limit formal enforcement actions for those sites. 

Activities: 

EPA regions will:

• Maintain focused enforcement efforts to compel cleanup early in the pipeline at nonemergency removal action and remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) stages; 

expedite remedial action by holding parties accountable to negotiation timeframes and 

scheduled cleanup commitments; and rejuvenate the process for identifying responsible 

parties at the site assessment stage where it appears likely that a removal or remedial 

response will be necessary. 

• Continue to focus on activities that maximize PRP involvement in all phases of response at 

Superfund sites. 

• Focus Superfund enforcement resources on the highest-priority sites and those enforcement 

activities that achieve the biggest return on our investment based on environmental risk. 

• Use Federal Facility Agreements (FFAs) or other applicable enforcement authorities (such as 

imminent and substantial endangerment orders in applicable circumstances), when federal 

facilities are not complying with the terms of the agreements or with other legal 

requirements. Additionally, regions and headquarters offices must collaborate to establish 

new agreements. The EPA has CERCLA Section 120 interagency agreements, known as 

FFAs, in place at all but two of 173 federal facility NPL sites. Those agreements govern the 

cleanups conducted by the facilities, delineate EPA’s oversight of those cleanups and identify 

procedures for resolving disputes and ensuring accountability. 

• Better utilize FFAs to make site performance data available to the public and otherwise 

empower citizen involvement to enhance cleanup oversight and accountability. 

• Implement the “nationally significant” consultation procedures; since all federal facility 

enforcement actions are “nationally significant” by OECA policy and require consultation 

with headquarters. This consultation will be even more important as the regions contemplate 

new work in this program. 

• Ensure that institutional controls are implemented at sites in potential environmental justice 

areas of concern.

• Implement the Community Engagement Initiative designed to enhance headquarters and 

regional program engagement with states, tribes, local communities and stakeholders to 

meaningfully participate in government decisions on land cleanup, emergency response, and 

the management of hazardous substances and waste. Information can be found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/oswer/docs/cei_action_plan_12-09.pdf.
41

• Provide site-specific fact sheets, which include enforcement information that is finalized and 

available to the public on regional web pages. 

Measures: See ACS measures OSRE-01, OSRE-02 and HQ-VOL in Appendix I, pages 7-8. 

For OSRE-02, the dollar threshold to pursue past costs was raised from $200,000 to $500,000 

consistent with the change in practice described above. For HQ-VOL, the HQ commitment for 

Volume of Contaminated Media Addressed (VCMA) has been adjusted from 300 to 275 million 

cubic yards per year. 

20. EPCRA 313 Toxics Release Inventory

Description: The EPA and the public rely on EPCRA 313 for information on chemical 

releases entering the environment. The EPA must ensure that companies report accurately and 

within required time frames so the publicly available database remains timely, accurate and 

inclusive. Regions should ensure the compliance of facilities that may be contributing to 

pollution problems that matter to their respective communities, and develop enforcement cases 

that produce significant environmental benefits.

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Physically inspect, send information requests or show cause letters, or use other agreed upon 

compliance monitoring activities (pursuant to the national dialogue on EPCRA 313 

compliance monitoring) to determine the compliance of enforcement targets developed by 

OECA/OEI. Address the following categories of concern as resources allow:

 Potential never-reporters (such as targeting facilities in the same sectors where a facility 

may not have reported but a similar facility in the same sector did report);

 Potential data quality issues (such as facilities with significant changes in release 

estimates or other waste management amounts from one year to the next or facilities in 

the same sector where a facility reports significantly more/less than a similar facility in 

the sector);

 Potential non/late-reporters (facilities that report in one year but failed to report the 

following year or any prior year up to the past five years);

 Additional OECA-provided targeting focusing on revisions, communities, chemicals, 

sectors of concern or new regulations, failures to comply with Notices of Noncompliance 

for non-certification and failures to correct Notices of Significant Errors. Regions may 

focus on facilities whose releases have the most impact on the TRI database (which is 

approximately 90 percent of the releases to be entered into the database). This will allow 

the regions flexibility in selecting their targets. 

• Track and prioritize tips and complaints and follow-up, as needed. 

• Work with the Air, RCRA and Water compliance and enforcement programs to add EPCRA 

questions to information requests where appropriate, evaluate the responses and take 

appropriate enforcement actions, consistent with national policy, or combine with other 

enforcement actions.
42

• Respond to OECA’s requests for reviewing draft TRI regulations for enforceability, the 

revised draft section 313 enforcement response and penalty policy and any other documents 

or proposed actions where OECA requests regional input on enforcement matters. 

• Provide legal and technical enforcement case support; obtain additional information through 

investigations, show cause letters, subpoenas and other actions, as appropriate, or determine 

that follow-up is not necessary. 

• Enter all federal enforcement cases into national databases in a timely and accurate manner. 

• As necessary, work with OECA to identify and evaluate program areas that could become 

national priorities/enforcement initiatives in the future.

Measures: See ACS measures EPCRA 01 and 02 in Appendix I, page 8. 

21. EPCRA 304, 311/312 and CERCLA 103 

Description: Chemical release notification and emergency preparedness are addressed under

EPCRA 304, 311 and 312 and CERCLA 103. The EPA and the public rely on EPCRA for 

information on chemical releases entering the environment, and on the storage of chemicals at 

facilities. The EPA, states, tribes, local entities, and communities rely on the combined EPCRA 

and CERCLA information to prepare local chemical emergency response plans, and to more 

safely and adequately respond to chemical emergencies. EPCRA sections 311 and 312 will 

continue to require facilities to develop or have available Safety Data Sheets and to provide 

annual reports on a facility’s chemical inventory directly to state and local emergency response 

entities. The statute authorizes citizen suits and civil suits by state or local governments against 

owners or operators of a facility for failure to comply with specific EPCRA provisions. 

Regarding federal enforcement, the EPA will focus resources on the highest priority violations, 

and be available to respond to significant enforcement issues (e.g. violations that create 

significant risks to communities, workers and first responders or state or tribal requests for 

federal action against recalcitrant facilities). Furthermore, the EPA will leverage agency-wide 

resources, as appropriate, to address this program; both OSWER and OECA agree that Risk 

Management Plan inspections should also include an evaluation of the facility’s compliance with 

EPCRA sections 304 and 311/312 and CERCLA 103. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should:

• Use screening and targeting tools to focus limited federal resources on national and regional 

priority areas. In targeting for inspections, regions should consider the presence of significant 

quantities of CERCLA hazardous or EPCRA extremely hazardous chemicals, proximity to 

population centers, a history of significant accidental releases and any other information that 

indicates a facility may be high-risk.

• Evaluate compliance with applicable EPCRA and CERCLA requirements during CAA 

section 112(r) inspections. 

• Within a reasonable period of time, evaluate and respond, if appropriate (including taking 

enforcement action where appropriate) to any tip or complaint containing allegations that 

provides a reasonable basis to believe that a violation has occurred. 
43

• Evaluate certain continuous release submissions for accuracy and compliance and take 

appropriate enforcement actions for non-compliance. 

• Focus resources on the highest priority violations and respond to significant enforcement 

issues.

• Enter timely, complete and accurate data into national databases.

22. Federal Activities

Description: The Office of Federal Activity’s work focuses on three areas: fostering 

compliance and pollution prevention through international cooperation; assisting other federal 

agencies in making environmentally sound decisions which include early public involvement and 

transparency by complying with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); and guiding 

the EPA’s own compliance with NEPA and applicable statutes and Executive Orders. 

Activities: 

EPA regions should work to assure international compliance and prevent illegal trans-boundary 

movement of hazardous waste by:

• Improving environmental performance and cooperation in accordance with Goal 5 of the 

U.S./Mexico Border 2020 Plan (Regions 6 and 9). 

• Enhancing enforcement, compliance, and capacity building efforts with Mexico and Canada 

relating to trans-boundary compliance monitoring on the U.S. borders for hazardous waste, ewaste, CFCs, selected chemicals and products (e.g., mercury, engines), and other regulated 

substances (border regions). 

• Improving performance of joint responsibilities along the border and ports of entry into the 

United States by working with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) through 

appropriate contact channels (all regions). 

• Promoting international environmental enforcement by supporting foreign capacity building 

efforts, as appropriate, and through participation in relevant organizations and networks, such 

as the Enforcement Working Group of the North American Commission for Environmental 

Cooperation (CEC) and the International Network for Environmental Compliance and 

Enforcement (INECE) and, in particular, its Seaport Environmental Security Network 

(regional participation as appropriate). 

• Reviewing the permit and compliance status of U.S. receiving facilities, utilizing established 

guidance, in connection with 100 percent of the notifications for the import of hazardous 

waste they receive from EPA headquarters and, based on the review, recommending consent 

or objection to notifications within the time periods allowed under applicable international 

agreements (all regions). 

• As a regular part of regional inspection activities, conducting periodic inspections of U.S. 

facilities which receive imported hazardous waste (TSDFs) and generators and other primary 

exporters of hazardous waste, cathode ray tubes (CRTs) and spent lead acid batteries 

(SLABs), based on information provided by OFA which identifies those facilities 

participating in import and export shipments. 

EPA regions should implement the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by: 
44

• Fulfilling the EPA’s obligations under NEPA and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act by 

reviewing and commenting on all major proposed federal actions to ensure identification, 

elimination or mitigation of significant adverse effects, and making the comments available 

to the public. 

• Ensuring that projects likely to have significant impacts (e.g., transportation, mountaintop 

mining, and energy) receive sound environmental analysis, use cooperation among agencies 

to resolve differences, consider environmental justice, incorporate innovation and support 

public involvement through a more streamlined and transparent environmental review 

process. 

• Ensuring that 70 percent of significant impacts identified by the EPA during the NEPA 

review of all major proposed federal actions will be mitigated. (GPRA measure) 

• Ensuring that at least 90 percent of EPA projects subject to NEPA environmental assessment 

or EIS requirements (e.g., water treatment facility projects and other grants, new source 

NPDES permits and EPA facilities) are expected to result in no significant environmental 

impact. 

• Promoting environmental justice considerations throughout the environmental decisionmaking process and encouraging public involvement early in the process to maximize 

transparency. 

• Preparing environmental analyses (EISs or EAs) and posting them on the internet or making 

categorical exclusion determinations for EPA-issued National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permits for new sources, for states/tribes without authorized 

NPDES programs; off-shore oil and gas sources, including permits for deepwater ports, EPA 

laboratories and facilities; and Clean Water Act wastewater treatment plant grants.

• Preparing environmental analyses (EAs or EISs) and posting them on the internet or making 

categorical exclusion determinations for Special Appropriation grants for wastewater, 

drinking water supply and solid waste collection facilities; Border Environment 

Infrastructure Funds (for the US/Mexico Border Environment Cooperation Commission 

projects); and reviews conducted under “EPA’s Voluntary NEPA Compliance Policy.”

• Entering the results of their 309 reviews and NEPA compliance actions into the Lotus Notes 

EIS Tracking Database maintained by headquarters OFA. Regions should report to the Office 

of Federal Activities quarterly on the status of their 309 reviews and NEPA compliance 

actions pursuant to the Government Performance Reporting Act reporting process.

23. Criminal Enforcement Program

Description: The criminal enforcement program investigates and assists in the criminal 

prosecution of knowing violations of environmental laws as well as any associated violation 

of the U.S. criminal code, such as wire fraud, smuggling, obstruction of justice, etc. The program 

works with other federal law enforcement agencies on cases of mutual interest, e.g., the 

Department of Homeland Security related to the illegal importation of banned pesticides. The 

program will continue to work with civil enforcement to look for criminal enforcement 

opportunities to advance National Enforcement Initiatives and instances of behavior on the part 

of regulated entities that represent inherently criminal conduct, such as falsifying data. The 

program will work with EPA civil enforcement and program offices in headquarters (HQ) and 

the regions to enhance the case screening process so that decisions to prosecute civilly or 
45

criminally are based on the best way to respond to the violation; the program will focus on 

securing the best results by providing clarity on when civil investigators should refer a matter to 

criminal enforcement and sharing criminal enforcement information with the civil enforcement 

program, where appropriate. The program will integrate environmental justice (EJ) concerns in 

assessments of criminal investigations and will use EPA's screening tools and regional input 

along with other relevant information. Cases that meet the threshold level for heightened analysis 

are considered to have potential EJ concerns for criminal enforcement purposes. 

Activities: 

EPA regions and OECA’s HQ Civil Program coordinate with the Office of Criminal 

Enforcement, Forensics and Training to: 

• Refer to the criminal enforcement program for consideration any matter that appears to be 

criminal in nature.

• Revise/update existing case screening policy memos to ensure that the criminal and civil 

enforcement programs are coordinating to ensure the optimal enforcement response to 

violations of federal environmental laws.

• Develop incentives and measures to ensure efficient sharing of information and resources 

between civil and criminal enforcement programs.

• Develop a shared civil/criminal case screening database, similar to the one developed in 

Region 1, for use in every region. 

• Conduct case screening sessions to agree upon the appropriate enforcement response to a 

potential criminal offense.

The Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics and Training will:

• Develop/refine criteria for Tier 1 (TI) and Tier 2 (T2) cases as well as for opening lower Tier 

cases. Identify NON-T1/T2 cases that offer high deterrent value because of cumulative 

impacts of many similar smaller cases. 

• Conduct semiannual case and docket reviews, by headquarters’ Criminal Investigation 

Division, of SAC offices to advance and track high impact cases, including T1 and T2. 

Determine which cases, if any, should be closed (especially Tiers 3 and 4); reallocate 

resources to higher-impact cases. 

• Meet with the regional EJ coordinator to obtain additional information supporting why the 

case has potential EJ concerns. 

• Develop and provide training for civil EPA counterparts to identify and share information 

regarding criminal conduct. 

• Through NEIC, evaluate new and emerging technologies needed to implement enhanced 

targeting and compliance assurance approaches. 

• Analyze emissions and compliance information to identify potential criminal violations by 

certain industrial sectors and individual facilities.

• Work with DOJ to: (1) explore innovative uses of criminal sentencing options, e.g., 

community service or environmental compliance plans; and (2) use information obtained 

pursuant to the Crimes Victim’s Rights Act (CVRA) when developing environmental crimes 

case resolutions, e.g., restitution.
46

• Provide targeted training to state, tribal and law enforcement partners, particularly the 

International Association of Chiefs of Police, to enhance their abilities to safely spot, report 

and address environmental violations. 

• Continue international enforcement efforts, e.g., working with INTERPOL to combat the 

illegal shipment of e-wastes.
1 

APPENDIX I 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

FY 2014 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX

G/O/S* ACS 

Code Measure Text

NonCommitment 

Indicator 

(Y/N)

State 

Performance 

Measure 

(Y/N)

Planning Target 12 National Target (FY 

2014 Pres. Bud)

 5 PBSATX03

Number of facilities evaluated for compliance within the 

national focus areas. N N Y N 

 5 PBSATX04

Number of addressing actions at facilities within the national 

focus areas. N N Y N 

 5 PBSNSR01 Number of NSR/PSD investigations of cement plants. N N Y N 

 5 PBSNSR02 Number of investigation completion reports or referrals to 

DOJ for cement plants.

N N Y N 

 5 PBSNSR03 Number of NSR/PSD investigations of glass manufacturing 

plants.

N N Y N 

 5 PBSNSR04 Number of completion reports or referrals to DOJ for glass 

manufacturing plants. N N

Y 

N 

 5 PBSNSR05 Number of NSR/PSD investigations of nitric and/or sulfuric 

acid plants. N N

Y 

N 

 5 PBS- Number of investigation completion reports or referrals to 

DOJ for nitric and/or sulfuric acid plants.

 N N Y N

 

12 Annual Commitment System (ACS) planning targets for FY 2014 are negotiated between the EPA regions and headquarters during 2013. For the measures 

which encompass state activities, the EPA regions coordinate with the affected states on the planning targets as applicable.
2 

NSR06

 5 PBS

-

NSR07 Number of NSR/PSD investigations of coal

-fired electric 

utilities.

N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

NSR08

Number of completion reports or referrals to DOJ for coal-

fired electric utilities. N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

NSR09

Number of facilities reviewed for prospective projects that 

trigger NSR. N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

M105

Number of Phase 1 municipal separate storm sewer system 

permit assessments conducted. N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

M106

Number of civil judicial referrals and/or addressing actions 

for sanitary sewer systems (SSS) with total treatment 

capacity ≥10 mgd.

N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

M107 Number of civil judicial referrals and /or addressing actions 

for CSS communities serving populations ≥50,000.

N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

M108 Number of civil judicial referrals and/or addressing actions 

for Phase I and II MS4s. 

N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

CAF002

Number of federal AFO/CAFO inspections (total number as 

well as number in priority areas). N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

CAF007 Number of federal CAFO addressing actions inside priority 

areas and in identified states. 

N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

CAF008 Submit 1 progress report per federal fiscal year. N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

MNP05

Number of targeted mines, mineral processing facilities, or 

both, inspected. N N Y N 

 5 PBS

-

EE01

Number of compliance evaluations/inspections conducted in 

any media at land-based natural gas extraction and 

production sites (e.g., wells, compressor stations, gas plants), 

and at disposal sites (e.g., injection wells, lagoons, ponds, 

land application). 

N N Y N 
3 

 5 PBS

-

EE03

Number of land-based natural gas extraction and production 

addressing actions. N N Y N 

5 SDWA02

 

During FY 2014, the primacy agency must address with a 

formal enforcement action or return to compliance the 

number of priority systems equal to the number of its PWSs 

that have a score of 11 or higher on the July 2013 ETT 

report. State, territory and tribal breakouts shall be indicated 

in the comment field of the Annual Commitment System.

Please note: A primacy agency’s success at addressing 

violations will be tracked by means of the quarterly ETT 

reports. Numerical targets may be adjusted at mid-year. 

While it remains the ERP’s goal that all of a priority 

system’s violations will be returned to compliance, a primacy 

agency has met its commitment under the 2014 SDWA ACS 

measure with respect to a priority system if the score for that 

system has been brought below, and remains below, eleven.

N Y Y 

 

 N 

5 SRF01

Regions in FY 2013 developed a plan to complete all Round 

3 state reviews by the end of calendar year 2016. OC and 

OWM will hold annual discussions with Regions to establish 

whether any modifications to the schedules are necessary. 

Conduct all Round 3 SRF reviews of state CAA, CWA and 

RCRA enforcement programs scheduled for calendar year 

2014. Conduct all CWA reviews using the integrated CWA-

NPDES program oversight process (permit and enforcement 

reviews). Review existing MOAs as part of the CWA-

NPDES review process in light of the OW/OECA criteria for 

MOA review and checklist. Ensure that MOAs are updated 

as needed by the end of FY 2017.

N N Y N 

 

 5 

 EJ01

Percentage of non-exempt cases brought by the EPA in areas 

determined by the EPA to have potential EJ concerns. 

[Note: While we are tracking this measure, there is no 

specific target number or trend we expect to achieve. EJ is 

one of many factors the Agency considers in bringing an 

enforcement action.] 

Y N N N 
4 

5 FED

-

FAC05

Conduct ten (10) federal facility inspections to support 

national Integrated Strategy Areas, exploratory categories, 

official regionally designated priorities or regional 

enforcement enhancement plans. These 10 inspection 

commitments can be achieved through any combination of 

single media or multimedia inspections, with the following 

limitations: (1) a maximum of four vulnerable community 

inspections can count toward this goal; and (2) for any 

multimedia inspection conducted, it shall count as up to four 

inspections toward this goal if up to four of the individual 

inspections support the Integrated Strategies and/or official 

Regionally-designated priorities. Further, up to four (4) 

official Regionally-designated priorities can count toward the 

commitment, if the Region determines that inspections up to 

that number are more desirable than the same number of 

Integrated Strategy inspections in the Region. Finally, all of 

these inspections may simultaneously satisfy inspection 

commitments required in any National Enforcement 

Initiative or other core program area. 

N N 100 federal facility 

inspections nationally

 N 

5 CWA07 

By December 31, 2013, provide to OECA a specific NPDES 

Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) plan for each 

authorized state in the Region and a Regional plan wherever 

EPA direct implementation occurs (i.e., non-authorized 

states, territories, Indian country, pretreatment, etc.), 

targeting the most significant sources with potential to 

impact water quality. Each plan should provide: (1) universe 

information for the CMS categories and sub-categories; (2) 

expected accomplishments for each category and 

subcategory (e.g., number of EPA inspections and number of 

state inspections); and (3) explanation of trade-offs made 

among the categories utilizing the flexibilities in the 2007 

NPDES CMS policy and any amendments or further 

guidance as a result of the national dialogue on compliance 

monitoring under the NPDES CMS. By December 31, 2014, 

or a later date, if one is negotiated through the ACS process, 

provide for each state and direct implementation area, a 

numerical end of year report on EPA and state inspection 

plan outputs, by category and subcategory. To increase the 

N N Y N 
5 

transparency of NPDES inspection data, OECA will make 

this data available to the public.

5 CAA04 

The number of compliance evaluations to be conducted by 

the Regions at majors sources, 80% synthetic minors, and 

other sources (as appropriate). [Note: Region should break 

out evaluation projections by source classification and by 

compliance monitoring category (FCE, PCE, and 

Investigations).] Projected investigations under this 

commitment are those investigations initiated by the Regions 

for the air enforcement program outside of the National 

Enforcement Initiatives, and identified by the air program 

(e.g., MACT, NSPS).

N N Y N 

5 CAA06 

Ensure that delegated state, tribal and local agencies 

implement their compliance and enforcement programs in 

accordance with the CAA CMS and have negotiated facility-

specific CMS plans in place. The Regions are to provide the 

number of FCEs at majors and 80% synthetic minors to be 

conducted by individual state/local agencies to demonstrate 

program implementation consistent with CMS. However, if 

a delegated agency negotiates with a Region an alternative 

CMS plan or alternative activities (pursuant to the CAA 

CMS national dialogue), this commitment should reflect the 

alternative plan. [Note: Break out evaluation and activity 

projections (e.g., FCEs; PCEs included in alternative plan) 

by source classification]. Prior to approving an alternative 

plan, Regions should consult with the Office of Compliance 

(OC) and provide OC with information on how the state, 

tribal or local agency compliance monitoring air resources 

will be redirected and the rationale for making the change. 

N Y Y N 

5 RCRA01

Project by state, and Indian country where applicable, the 

number of operating non-governmental TSDFs, to be 

inspected by the Region during the year. Regions must 

commit to inspect at least two (2) TSDFs in each state or 

Indian country unless OECA approves a deviation from this 

requirement. For example, deviations are given for states 

N N Minimum of 100 

TSDFs nationally

 N 
6 

with s mall universes where it might not make sense for a 

Region to inspect two TSDFs per year. Financial 

responsibility is an important component of the RCRA core 

program and evaluating compliance with 40 CFR Parts 

264/265 Subpart H should be included as part of the 

inspection of each TSDF (although such evaluations do not 

have to occur at the same time nor be conducted by the same 

people who conduct the field inspections). If a Region 

determines that there are unique circumstances in the Region 

or with a particular TSDF, the Region may contact 

headquarters to discuss undertaking a detailed evaluation of 

compliance with 40 CFR Parts 264/265 Subpart H at another 

TSDF. 

5 RCRA01. s 

Project by state the number of operating TSDFs to be 

inspected by the state during the year. 

Note: Only one inspection per facility counts towards this 

coverage measure. The RCRA CMS establishes minimum 

annual inspection expectations for TSDFs. At least 50 

percent of the operating non-governmental TSDFs in the 

state must be inspected annually. The onsite inspections for 

RCRA01 and RCRA01.s should be CEIs. Completing the 

commitment includes evaluating compliance with the 

financial assurance requirements, 40 CFR Parts 264/265 

Subpart H. Financial responsibility is an important 

component of the RCRA core program and should be 

included as part of the inspection of each TSDF (although 

the financial responsibility reviews do not have to occur at 

the same time nor be conducted by the same people who 

conduct the field inspections).

N Y Y N 

5 RCRA02

Project by state and Indian country, the number of LQGs, 

including those at federal facilities, to be inspected by the 

Region during the year. Each Region must commit to 

inspect at least six (6) LQGs in each state, and 20% of the 

region’s LQGs universe in Indian country, unless OECA 

approves a deviation from this requirement. For example, 

deviations are given for states with small universes where it 

N N 

Minimum of 300 

LQG inspections 

nationally and 20% 

of LQGs in Indian 

Country

 N 
7 

doesn’t make sense for a Region to inspect 6 LQGs per year 

or 20% of the Region’s LQG universe in Indian country. 

Regions should select at least 2 of the Region's total LQG 

inspections at facilities described in the high priority section 

as areas of emerging environmental concern. Regions may 

work with OECA to coordinate these inspections, including 

whether the inspection will be conducted at a TSDF or LQG. 

In the Comment Section, provide the number of federal 

facility LQG inspections. 

5 RCRA02. s

Project by state the number of LQGs to be inspected by the 

state during the year. At least 20 percent of the LQG 

universe should be covered by combined federal and state 

inspections unless an alternative plan is approved under the 

RCRA CMS. 

N Y Y N 

5 RCRA03 

Inspect each operating TSDF operated by states, local, or 

Tribal governments. N N Y N 

5 HQ-VOL

Volume of Contaminated Media Addressed (VCMA). As 

part of the Goal 5 sub-objective, Support Cleaning up Our 

Communities, the following is the GPRA target: 

By 2015, obtain commitments to clean up 1.5 billion cubic 

yards of contaminated soil and groundwater media as a 

result of concluded CERCLA and RCRA corrective action 

enforcement actions. 

OECA has reported VCMA for contaminated soil and 

groundwater media as separate measures in its annual results 

since 2004. The GPRA target is a national target and regions 

are not required to post commitments in ACS.

N N 275 million cubic 

yards N 

5 

TSCA 

01OC

Project the total number of FY2013 TSCA inspections. In 

the comment field of the Annual Commitment System 

(ACS), the Region shall break out the number of projected 

inspections by TSCA program area (LBP, PCBs, Asbestos, 

New and Existing Chemicals). Note: For the reasons 

discussed in the executive summary, the LBP component of 

N N Y N 
8 

this TSCA ACS commitment (TSCA 01OC) will serve as 

OECA’s FY 2014 measure of compliance work being done to 

protect children's health.

5 

TSCA 

02OC

Report other compliance monitoring activities at the end of 

the year; and break-out the description of other such 

activities by TSCA program area. (See the CMS and the 

future outcomes of the compliance monitoring national 

dialogue for more details). 

Y N N N 

5 FIFRA

-

FED1

Project regional (federal) FIFRA inspections. Each Region 

should conduct a minimum of ten (10) FIFRA inspections. 

In the Comment Section, provide the number of federal 

facility inspections.

N N 

Minimum of 100 

FIFRA federal

inspections nationally

 N 

5 OSRE

-01 Reach a settlement or take an enforcement action by the start 

of remedial action at 99% of non-federal Superfund sites that 

have viable, liable parties.

N N 99 percent N 

5 OSRE-02

Address all unaddressed costs in Statute of Limitations cases 

for sites with total past Superfund costs via settlement, 

referral to DOJ, filing a claim in bankruptcy, or where 

appropriate write-off. 

N N 

100 percent of cases 

equal to or greater 

than $500,000 in 

value

 N 

5 OSRE-04

Inspect at least one (1) RCRA corrective action financial 

assurance instrument per state, with at least 50% being 

financial test or corporate guarantee reviews. Where the 

submission is noncompliant, take appropriate enforcement 

action to address noncompliance (e.g., notice of violation). 

Or, where appropriate, work with the state to ensure 

appropriate action is taken to address noncompliance. If 

possible, return facility to compliance by end of fiscal year.

N N Minimum of 50 

inspections nationally N 

5 EPCRA 

01

Conduct at least four (4) EPCRA 313 data quality 

inspections. N N Minimum of 40 nationally N 

5 EPCRA 

02

Conduct at least twenty (20) EPCRA 313 non-reporter 

inspections (and/or other compliance monitoring activities as 

determined by the compliance monitoring national dialogue). N N Minimum of 200 nationally N 

*Goal/Objective/Sub-Heading 
1 

 Appendix II - EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2013 AND FY 2014 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Change from FY 2013 Guidance Document Reason for Change Affected Pages and Sections

National 

Areas of 

Focus

Modification: Advancing Next Generation 

Compliance is explicitly identified as a national 

area of focus or priority for FY 2014. The NPM 

Guidance identifies work which OECA and the 

regions will perform in five areas in FY 2014.

Next Generation Compliance was identified as a 

critical new area of investment for FY 2013. 

For FY 2014, OECA identified it as a National 

Area of Focus; more specific activities for 

implementation have been identified for FY 

2014.

Section III – pages 10-12 

Modification: The activities under 

Strengthening State Performance and Oversight

have been updated to reflect the focus for FY 

2014. They have also been identified as a 

“national area of focus” consistent with the 

agency’s new format and terminology used for 

the FY 2014 NPM Guidance.

The NPM Guidance was updated to reflect the 

activities to be implemented in FY 2014. These 

activities will be a focus area for OECA and the 

regions for FY 2014.

Section III – pages 12-14

Modification: The activities under Implementing 

the Clean Water Act Action Plan have been 

updated to reflect the focus for FY 2014. 

Implementing the Clean Water Act Action Plan is 

identified as a separate national area of focus in 

FY 2014.

It was necessary to update the activities which 

will be the focus in FY 2014. 

Section III – pages 8-10

ProgramSpecific 

Guidance

Modification: Every Program Specific Guidance 

write-up has been shortened, reformatted and 

updated to reflect any changes for FY 2014, even 

if they are minor revisions.

It was necessary to update the focus of activities 

for FY 2014 and to follow the new agency-wide 

standard format for the NPM guidance. 

Section IV

Modification: For RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous 

Waste Program, there was a change in the sectors 

to consider when developing strategies for 

targeting compliance assurance work and annual 

plans for respective activities in the regions.

The sector added for consideration was: Zinc 

hazardous secondary materials recyclers. 

Section IV – page 26
2 

Modification: For RCRA Underground Storage 

Tank (UST) Subtitle I Program, the narrative was 

updated for FY 2014.

With regard to regional inspections of owners 

and operators of USTs located in Indian 

Country, it was necessary to mention that 

inspections in Indian Country will be conducted 

consistent with the Energy Policy Act 3 year 

inspection requirement.

Pages 28-29

Modification: TSCA PCBs compliance 

monitoring and enforcement work has been 

updated for FY 2014.

It was necessary to update the focus of activities 

for FY 2014.

Section IV – pages 32-34

Modification: TSCA asbestos compliance 

monitoring and enforcement work has been 

updated for FY 2014.

It was necessary to update the focus of activities 

for FY 2014.

Section IV – pages 34-35

Deletion: The TSCA Formaldehyde Rule has not 

been proposed so there are no references to it in 

the FY 2014 NPM Guidance.

OECA will need to evaluate the final rule when 

it is issued to determine what if any 

enforcement activities we'll be asking the 

regions to undertake 

Section IV - pages N/A

Modification: The CERCLA section of the 

guidance notes a change in the dollar threshold to 

pursue past costs; the threshold was raised from 

$200,000 to $500,000.

OECA believes that savings can be achieved by 

focusing Superfund enforcement resources on 

the highest-priority sites and those enforcement 

activities that achieve the greatest return on 

investment. 

Section IV – pages 39-41

Annual 

Commitment 

Measures

Addition: All of the ACS measures for National 

Enforcement Initiatives (NEIs) are included in 

OECA’s NPM Guidance for FY 2014. These are 

not new measures; only their inclusion in the 

NPM guidance is new. 

These NEI ACS measures are not new. 

However, they were not included in previous 

NPM Guidance documents. In the interest of 

providing comprehensive ACS measures 

information in one location and adhering to the 

new agency-wide standard format for the NPM 

Guidance, these measures are now included in 

the FY 2014 NPM Guidance.

Appendix I – page 1 through top 

of page 3; measures associated 

with NEIs begin with code 

“PBS.”
3 

Modification: A clarifying note was added to 

SDWA 02.

To provide clarity, an explanatory note was 

added to the ACS measure.

Appendix I – page 3

Modification: SRF01 was updated to reflect the 

focus for FY 2014.

Measure was updated to take into account the 

fact that the Regions, in FY 2013, already 

developed a plan to complete all Round 3 state 

reviews by the end of calendar year 2016. The 

updated language states that all Round 3 SRF 

reviews scheduled for FY 2014 should be 

conducted. MOAs are to be updated as needed 

by the end of FY 2017.

Appendix I – page 3

Modification: EJ01 was updated for FY 2014. The new FY 2014 measure is: 

Percentage of non-exempt cases brought by the 

EPA in areas determined by the EPA to have 

potential EJ concerns. While we are tracking 

this measure, there is no specific target number 

or trend we expect to achieve. EJ is one of 

many factors the Agency considers in bringing 

an enforcement action.

Appendix I – page 3

Modification: Fed-FAC05 was slightly modified. The measure was updated to reflect the focus of 

FY 2014 federal facility inspections.

Appendix I – page 4

Modification: CWA07 was updated. The deadline for submittal of the specific 

NPDES Compliance Monitoring Strategy was 

updated.

Appendix I – page 4

Modification: CAA04 was updated. The language was updated so it did not reflect a 

reference to the Compliance Monitoring 

National Dialogue.

Appendix I – page 5
4 

Modification: HQ-VOL was revised. For HQ-VOL, the HQ commitment for Volume 

of Contaminated Media Addressed (VCMA) has 

been adjusted from 300 to 275 million cubic 

yards per year. 

Appendix I – page 7

Modification: Titles of TSCA01 and 02 were 

expanded

At the suggestion of an EPA regional office, the 

titles of two TSCA ACS measures were 

expanded for FY 2014 to avoid confusion with a 

similarly numbered ACS measure from an EPA 

program office. The designation “OC” was 

added following each of the numbers so they 

currently read: TSCA 01OC and TSCA 02OC.

Appendix 1 – pages 7-8

Modification: OSRE-02 was revised to reflect a 

new dollar threshold to pursue past costs.

For OSRE-02, the dollar threshold to pursue 

past costs was raised from $200,000 to 

$500,000 consistent with the change in practice. 

Appendix I – page 8.
1 

Appendix III – OECA Key Contacts Appendix for each section of OECA’s FY 2014 NPM Guidance

Note: For the convenience of readers, more than one OECA contact is listed for most of the subject areas below. 

Contact Name Subject Area Phone Email

Scott Throwe

Phil Brooks

Clean Air Act (CAA) National Enforcement Initiative (NEI): 

Cutting Toxic Air Pollution that Affects Communities’ Health

202-564-7013

202-564-0652

throwe.scott@epa.gov

brooks.phil@epa.gov

Ed Messina

Phil Brooks

Apple Chapman

CAA NEI: Reducing Widespread Air Pollution from the Largest 

Sources, Especially the Coal-fired Utility, Cement, Class, and 

Acid Sectors

202-564-2300

202-564-0652

202-564-5666

messina.ed@epa.gov

brooks.phil@epa.gov

chapman.apple@epa.gov 

Rick Duffy 

Loren Denton

Seth Heminway

Clean Water Act (CWA) NEI: Keeping Raw Sewage and 

Contaminated Storm water Out of Our Nation’s Waters

202-564-5014

202-564-1148

202-564-7017

duffy.rick@epa.gov

denton.loren@epa.gov

heminway.seth@epa.gov

Ann Pontius 

Mark Pollins

Carol Galloway

Kathy Greenwald

CWA NEI: Preventing Animal Waste from Contaminating 

Surface and Ground Waters

202-564-6266

202-564-4001

913-551-5092

202-564-3252

pontius.ann@epa.gov

pollins.mark@epa.gov

galloway.carol@epa.gov

greenwald.kathryn@epa.gov

Martha Segall

Joyce Chandler

Ben Bahk

Assuring Safe Drinking Water 202-564-0723

202-564-7073

202-564-4293

segall.martha@epa.gov

chandler.joyce@epa.gov

bahk.benjamin@epa.gov

Van Housman Reducing Pollution from Mineral Processing Operations NEI 202-564-0143 housman.van@epa.gov

Mamie Miller 

Andrew Stewart

Rob Lischinsky

Assuring Energy Extraction Sector Compliance with 

Environmental Laws NEI

202-564-7011

202-564-1463

202-564-2628

miller.mamie@epa.gov

stewart.andrew@epa.gov

lischinsky.robert@epa.gov

Martha Segall

Amy Porter

Seth Heminway

Implementing the Clean Water Act (CWA) Action Plan 202-564-0723

202-564-2431

202-564-7017

segall.martha@epa.gov

porter.amy@epa.gov

heminway.seth@epa.gov

David Hindin 

Jon Silberman

Advancing Next Generation Compliance 202-564-1300

202-564-2429

hindin.david@epa.gov

silberman.jon@epa.gov

Chris Knopes Strengthening State Performance and Oversight 202-564-2337 knopes.christopher@epa.gov

Loan Nguyen 

Nathaniel Folkemer

Environmental Justice 202-564-4041

202-564-0668

nguyen.loan@epa.gov

folkemer.nathaniel@epa.gov

Mike Shields Federal Facilities 202-564-9035 shields.mike@epa.gov

Martha Segall CWA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 202-564-0723 segall.martha@epa.gov
2 

Amy Porter

Seth Heminway

Rebecca Roose

(NPDES) Program for Compliance Assurance and 

Enforcement

202-564-2431

202-564-7017

202-566-1387

porter.amy@epa.gov

heminway.seth@epa.gov

roose.rebecca@epa.gov

Joe Theis CWA Section 404 – Discharge of Dredge and Fill Material 202-564-4053 theis.joseph@epa.gov

Martha Segall 

Joe Theis

Dan Chadwick

CWA Section 311 – Oil Pollution Act 202-564-0723

202-564-4053

202-564-7054

segall.martha@epa.gov

theis.joseph@epa.gov

chadwick.dan@epa.gov

Loren Denton

Martha Segall

Dan Chadwick

SDWA Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program 202-564-1148

202-564-0723

202-564-7054

denton.loren@epa.gov

segall.martha@epa.gov

chadwick.dan@epa.gov

Julius Banks

Rob Lischinsky

CAA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement 202-564-0957

202-564-2628

banks.julius@epa.gov

lischinsky.rob@epa.gov

Craig Haas

Greg Sullivan

Julius Banks

Rob Lischinsky

CAA Section 112(r) 202-564-6447

202-564-1298

202-564-0957

202-564-2628

haas.craig@epa.gov

sullivan.greg@epa.gov

banks.julius@epa.gov

lischinsky.rob@epa.gov

Diana Saenz

Julie Simpson

John Mason

RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Program 202-564-4209

202-566-1980

202-564-7037

saenz.diana@epa.gov

simpson.julie@epa.gov

mason.john@epa.gov

Brian Joffe RCRA Underground Storage Tank UST Subtitle I Program 202-564-2229 joffe.brian@epa.gov

Peter Neves

Paul Borst

RCRA Corrective Action 202-564-6072

202-564-7066

neves.peter@epa.gov

borst.paul@epa.gov

Greg Sullivan

Julie Simpson

Everett Bishop

John Mason

TSCA13

• Lead Risk Reduction Program

• New and Existing Chemicals Program

• PCB Program 

• Asbestos Program/AHERA

202-564-1298

202-566-1980

202-564-7032

202-564-7037

sullivan.greg@epa.gov

simpson.julie@epa.gov

bishop.everett@epa.gov

mason.john@epa.gov

Brian Joffe

Julie Simpson

David Stangel

FIFRA14

• FIFRA Program for Compliance Assurance and Enforcement

• Imports

202-564-2229

202-566-1980

202-564-4162

joffe.brian@epa.gov

simpson.julie@epa.gov

stangel.david@epa.gov

 

13 The TSCA contacts can respond to questions on the TSCA subject areas. However, Everett Bishop is the Office of Compliance (OC) staff contact for PCB and 

asbestos program questions, while John Mason is the OC staff contact for Lead Program questions.

14 The FIFRA contact names can respond to questions on the FIFRA subject areas. However, with regard to FIFRA imports, the primary contact is Brian Joffe.
3 

• Supplemental Registrations

• Region-Specific Focus Area

Paul Borst CERCLA 202-564-7066 borst.paul@epa.gov

Kathy Clark

Greg Sullivan

Julie Simpson

EPCRA 313 Toxics Release Inventory 202-564-4164

202-564-1298

202-566-1980

clark.kathy@epa.gov

sullivan.greg@epa.gov

simpson.julie@epa.gov

Craig Haas

Greg Sullivan

EPCRA 304, 311/312 and CERCLA 103 202-564-6447

202-564-1298

haas.craig@epa.gov

sullivan.greg@epa.gov

Cliff Rader

Bob Heiss*

Federal Activities 

• NEPA compliance and Environmental Impact Statement reviews 

• Import/export of hazardous waste and international capacity 

building*

202-564-7159

202-564-4108

rader.cliff@epa.gov

heiss.robert@epa.gov

Pete Rosenberg Criminal Enforcement Program 202-564-2611 rosenberg.peter@epa.gov

Jonathan Binder

Fran Jonesi

OECA Tribal Issues 202-564-2516

202-564-7043

binder.jonathan@epa.gov

jonesi.fran@epa.gov

Maureen Lydon

Michele McKeever

OECA’s FY 2014 National Program Manager (NPM) Guidance 202-564-4046

202-564-3688

lydon.maureen@epa.gov

mckeever.michele@epa.gov