Charting Our Cou
EPAS MISSION: 

To Protect Human Health 

and the Environment 
2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan: 

Charting Our Course 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

September 30, 2006 
I

am pleased to present the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2006-2011 Strategic Plan, 

which charts an ambitious course for the Agency’s 

work over the next five years. 

This Strategic Plan maintains the five goals that were first described in the 

2003-2008 Plan and discusses important new challenges and opportunities that 

are likely to arise in the coming years. The 2006-2011 Plan better expresses the 

results of our work and more clearly identifies the environmental and human 

health outcomes the public can expect. The Plan also expands upon some of our 

more significant geographic initiatives and reflects increased collaboration with 

our state, tribal, local, and federal partners. 

In December 2005, EPA celebrated 35 years of working to protect human 

health and the environment. Since 1970, EPA—in collaboration with our 

partners and stakeholders—has been delivering a cleaner, healthier environment 

for the public. From regulating auto emissions to banning the use of DDT; from 

cleaning up toxic waste to protecting the ozone layer; and from increasing 

recycling to revitalizing inner-city brownfields, EPA’s achievements have 

resulted in cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land. 

The President has charged EPA with accelerating the pace of environmental 

protection while maintaining our nation’s economic competitiveness. This Plan 

lays the foundation to meet our long-term goals and demonstrate progress along 

the way, consistent with our principles of results and accountability, innovation 

and collaboration, and the use of the best available science. We are grateful to 

our partners and stakeholders for their continuing help in achieving these goals, 

and pledge to continue our efforts to ensure a safe and healthy environment for 

future generations. 

Stephen L. Johnson 

Administrator 
Objective 1.1: Healthier Outdoor Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12


Objective 1.2: Healthier Indoor Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19


Objective 1.3: Protect the Ozone Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20


Objective 1.4: Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21


Objective 1.5: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23


Objective 1.6: Enhance Science and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25


Goal 2—Clean and Safe Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32


Objective 2.1: Protect Human Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36


Objective 2.2: Protect Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43


Objective 2.3: Enhance Science and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50


Goal 3—Land Preservation and Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58


Objective 3.1: Preserve Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62


Objective 3.2: Restore Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67


Objective 3.3: Enhance Science and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72


Goal 4—Healthy Communities and Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78


Objective 4.1: Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks . . . . . . . . . .83


Objective 4.2: Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91


Objective 4.3: Restore and Protect Critical Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . .97


Objective 4.4: Enhance Science and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109

4 

Objective 5.3: 	Improve Human Health and the 


Environment in Indian Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Objective 5.4: 	Enhance Society’s Capacity for Sustainability 


Through Science and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Cross-Goal Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Results and Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Innovation and Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Best Available Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Appendix A: Social Costs and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Appendix B: Proposed Future Program Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Appendix C: Summary of Consultation Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Appendix D: 	Areas of Coordination Between 


EPA and Other Federal Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
2

59

55

68

66

61

64

62

79

70

75

79

77

71

78

87

83

84

82

86

80

85

82

1016

1008

75

1012

63

61

56

59

59

59

59

55

55

55

55

55

58

58

58

58

68

68

66

66

66

63

65

60

61

64

63

62

75

78

74 76

74

7

71

79

77 78

79

73

73

70

75

70

79

78

74

3

0

86

87

87

80

87

89

1024 1024 H

L1002

L1004

L1006

1012 H

1016 H

1019 H 72

72

71

88 77

71

1020

3

8

69

60

51

1

air, water, and land. 

But while we have achieved a great deal, we recognize 

that much work remains. The environmental problems we are facing in 2006 are more complex than those of 30 years ago, and 

implementing solutions is more challenging. Recent national and 

international events, such as the devastation left by Hurricane 

Katrina, the advance of Avian flu, threats to homeland security, and population growth and its 

associated resource consumption, are altering the environment in unprecedented ways. 

Scientific advances and emerging technologies offer new opportunities for protecting human 

health and the environment, but also pose new risks and challenges. We recognize that today’s 

environmental problems cannot be solved by traditional regulatory controls alone; they will 

require the combined expertise, perspectives, and resources of many. More than ever before, we 

need to look toward the future to anticipate potential threats to human health and the environment, establish clear priorities, and prepare ourselves to address them. 

OUR GOALS AND 

STRATEGIES 

EPA’s 2006-2011 Strategic 

Plan sets out an ambitious 

road map for environmental 

protection over the next 

5 years. In developing this 

Plan, we have sharpened our 

focus on achieving measurable 

environmental results. Our 

five strategic goals reflect 

the results we are striving 

to achieve: Clean Air and 

Global Climate Change, 

Clean and Safe Water, Land 

Preservation and Restoration, 

Healthy Communities and 

Ecosystems, and Compliance 

and Environmental 

Stewardship. 

GOALS OF THE 2006-2011 STRATEGIC PLAN

• Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

• Clean and Safe Water 

• Land Preservation and Restoration 

• Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

• Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

CROSS-GOAL STRATEGIES

• Results and Accountability 

• Innovation and Collaboration 

• Best Available Science 
997

2003

1749

1251

1600

1694

867

1000

6 

To provide the public with the environmental 

results it expects and deserves, we must operate 

as efficiently and effectively as possible. 

Accountability for results is a key component 

of the President’s Management Agenda, 

designed to make government citizen-centered, 

results-oriented, and market-based. 

• Innovation and Collaboration. Our progress depends both on our ability and conti

commitment to identify and use innovative tools, approaches, and solutions to add

environmental problems and to engage extensively with our partners, stakeholders, 

the public. Under each of our goals, we are working to promote a sense of environm

stewardship and a shared responsibility for addressing today’s challenges. 

• Best Available Science. EPA needs the best scientific information available to antici

potential environmental threats, evaluate risks, identify solutions, and develop protec

standards. Sound science helps us ask the right questions, assess information, and cha

problems clearly to inform Agency decision makers. 

GUIDING MANAGEMENT AND 

BUDGET DECISIONS 

In setting out our goals for the co

5 years and describing how we intend 

achieve them, our Strategic Plan provi

the foundation for all of EPA’s planni

budgeting, performance measurement

accountability processes. We will desi

annual performance goals and measur

which are presented in the President’

request to Congress, to achieve the lo

strategic goals set out in this Plan. We 

report on our performance against the

annual goals and measures in our ann

Performance and Accountability Report 

use this performance information as we establish priorities and develop future budget sub

sions. This process will come full circle as we evaluate these performance data to develo

2009-2014 and future Strategic Plans. In addition, our strategic planning and decision ma
56

16 17

18

17 18

23

26

20

18

18

17 21

19

21

13 13 10

31

37

16

19 18

17

18

17 1

395

9960-X-27400

405

410

415

420

27425

2

3

7

4

2

2

2

6

3 5

6

3

2

8

12

12

12 14

2

2 2

12

12

12

47

54 70

improvements and additions. For example, under each goal we 

have provided a discussion of “Emerging Issues and External 

Factors”—important new challenges and opportunities that are 

likely to arise in the coming years. The goal chapters also 

include new information about developing the long-term 

measures included in the Plan, particularly their relationship to 

annual performance measures, measures provided in the Office 

of Management and Budget’s Program Assessment Rating Tool, 

and the new environmental indicators being developed for 

EPA’s Report on the Environment. This Plan also reflects our 

increased emphasis on activities and measures that address 

tribal environmental and health issues, environmental justice 

concerns, environmental stewardship, and strategic management of human capital. 

We have prepared this Strategic Plan to present our vision for the future and to guide our 

work over the coming years to achieve these results. We hope that you will join with us to 

realize our common desire for a cleaner, healthier environment for all Americans. 

Lyons Gray 

Chief Financial Officer 
GOAL 1
Clean Air and 

Global Climate 

Change 

Protect and improve the air so it is 

healthy to breathe and risks to human 

health and the environment are reduced. 

Reduce greenhouse gas intensity by 

enhancing partnerships with businesses 

and other sectors. 
pp g

and emission inventories, that allow states, tribes, and localities to add

more localized problems. Many of these tools employ innovative techn

such as partnership programs for retrofitting diesel engines or commun

based approaches to toxics, which are well-suited to the local nature o

these challenges. 

EPA’s programs will allow us, together with our partners, to make substantial progress in prot

human health and ecosystems from air pollution. By 2011, virtually all of the country will have 

place controls to meet current air quality standards. New motor vehicles, including trucks and b

will be 75 to 95 percent cleaner than they were in 2003. Power plant emissions will be reduced 

approximately 40 percent from 2003 levels. Taken together, these programs, when fully impleme

will prevent tens of thousands of premature deaths and hospitalizations, and prevent millions of 

work and school days each year. These national programs will be supplemented by local control 

strategies designed to ensure that the air quality standards are achieved and maintained. 

Reductions in emissions of air toxics will substantially reduce risks to human health. Toxic 

emissions from cars, trucks, and buses will be cut in half, and all major industrial sources of air to

will meet technology-based standards. Additional risk reductions will be achieved by voluntary 

programs aimed at indoor hazards such as radon, tobacco smoke, and asthma triggers, and outdo

hazards such as overexposure to the sun. Radiation releases will be minimized, and our ability to 

monitor such releases will be enhanced. Should a radiation release occur, EPA personnel and ass

will be in place and prepared to support federal emergency response and to minimize impacts to 

human health and the environment. 

Significant achievements will also be realized in EPA’s domestic and international efforts to 

and restore the world’s atmosphere. By 2011, worldwide efforts to protect the earth's ozone layer 

reach a watershed, as total effective equivalent stratospheric chlorine reaches its peak and begin

decline. And EPA's voluntary climate protection programs will put us on track to exceed the 

President’s greenhouse gas intensity goal. 

William L. Wehrum 

Acting Assistant Administrator 

Office of Air and Radiation 

10

Clean Air and Global 

Climate Change 

Air pollution comes from many sources: factories and EPA works to protect human health and t

power plants; drycleaners; cars, buses, and trucks; even environment by developing regulations and est

windblown dust and wildfires. It can threaten human partnerships with other federal agencies, states

health, causing breathing difficulties, long-term damage to local governments, business and industry, env

respiratory and reproductive sys- groups, and other stakeholder

tems, cancer, and premature grams to reduce air pollution. 

death. Certain chemicals emitted according to our annual summ

into the air diminish the protective OBJECTIVES air quality trends since the 19

ozone layer in the upper atmos­ quality in the United States h

phere, resulting in overexposure to Objective 1.1: Healthier improved. Even as our econo

ultraviolet radiation and increased Outdoor Air . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 grown, miles traveled by cars 

rates of skin cancer, cataracts, and Objective 1.2: Healthier increased, and energy consum

other health and ecological effects. Indoor Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 risen, the trend toward cleane

Air pollution can also affect the Objective 1.3: Protect the continued. 

environment by reducing visibility; Ozone Layer . . . . . . . . . . . .20 EPA is dedicated to impro

damaging crops, forests, and buildings; acidifying lakes and streams; Objective 1.4: Radiation . . .21 quality of the air Americans b

and we will continue to look f

and stimulating the growth of algae Objective 1.5: Reduce tive, effective solutions to the 

in estuaries and the build-up of Greenhouse Gas Emissions 23 remaining air pollution proble

toxins in fish. These effects pose a Objective 1.6: Enhance use a variety of approaches an

particular risk to Native Americans Science and Research . . . . .25 accomplish this. For example, 

and others who subsist on plants, addressing problems with broa

fish, and game. Rapid development or global impact—emissions f

and urbanization in other countries 

are creating air pollution that threatens not only those plants and other large sources, pollution from 

countries but also the United States, since air pollution cles and fuels, and stratospheric ozone depletio

federal level, using our traditional regulatory 

can travel great distances and across national boundaries. well as innovative, market-based techniques su
p

and Emissions
 p 

200% 

150% 

100% 

50% 

0% 

-50% 

195% 

178% 

48% 

42% 

-53% 

Population 

Aggregate Emissions*(Six Principal Pollutants) 

Gross Domestic Product 

Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Energy Consumption 

70 80 90 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 

*Pollutants: Ozone, Particulate Matter, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfer Dioxide, Lead 

Presidential/Congressional Commiss

Assessment and Risk Management. 

the quality of the air in homes, schoo

commercial buildings, EPA relies on 

ship-based information and outreach 

which encourage and promote volun

Our radon and other indoor air prog

helped to reduce asthma triggers, res

ments, ear infections, exposure to se

tobacco smoke, and hospitalizations. 

EPA research continues to iden

air pollution issues, in areas from in

radiation. We will work with our fe

state, tribal, local, and internationa

and stakeholders to address these iss

approaches and programs that enco

effective technologies and practices. 

OBJECTIVE 1.1: HEALTHIER OUTDOOR AIR 

THROUGH 2011, WORKING WITH PARTNERS, PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND T

ENVIRONMENT BY ATTAINING AND MAINTAINING HEALTH-BASED AIR-QUALITY 

STANDARDS AND REDUCING THE RISK FROM TOXIC AIR POLLUTANTS. 

Sub-objective 1.1.1: Ozone and PM2.5. 

By 2015, working with partners, improve 

air quality for ozone and PM2.5 as follows: 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2015, reduce the populationweighted ambient concentration of 

ozone in all monitored counties by 

14 percent from the 2003 baseline. 

•	 By 2015, reduce the popula

weighted ambient concentr

PM2.5 in all monitored coun

6 percent from the 2003 ba

•	 By 2011, reduce emissions o

particles from mobile source

134,700 tons from the 2000 

510,550 tons. 

12 
areas will improve by 15 percent on 

the 20 percent worst visibility days, 

as compared to visibility on the 

20 percent worst days during the 

2000–2004 baseline period. 

•	 By 2018, visibility in western Class I 

areas will improve by 5 percent on 

the 20 percent worst visibility days, 

as compared to visibility on the 

20 percent worst days during the 

2000–2004 baseline period. 

•	 By 2011, with EPA support, 30 

additional tribes (6 per year) will 

have completed air quality emission 

inventories. (FY 2005 baseline: 28 

tribal emission inventories.) 

•	 By 2011, 18 additional tribes will 

possess the expertise and capability to 

implement the Clean Air Act in 

Indian country2 (as demonstrated by 

successful completion of an eligibility 

determination under the Tribal 

Authority Rule). (FY 2005 baseline: 

24 tribes.) 

Sub-objective 1.1.2: Air Toxics. By 2011, 

reduce the risk to public health and the environment from toxic air pollutants by working 

with partners to reduce air toxics emissions 

and implement area-specific approaches as 

follows: 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2010, reduce toxicity-weighted 

(for cancer risk) emissions of air toxics to a cumulative reduction of 19 

Sub-objective 1.1.3: Chronically Acidic 

Water Bodies. By 2011, due to progress in 

reducing acid deposition, the number of 

chronically-acidic water bodies in acid-sensitive regions of the northern and eastern 

United States should be maintained at or 

below the 2001 baseline of approximately 500 

lakes and 5,000 kilometers of stream-length 

in the population covered by the Temporally 

Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems/LongTerm Monitoring Survey. The long-term 

target is a 30 percent reduction in the number of chronically-acidic water bodies in 

acid-sensitive regions by 2030. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, reduce national annual 

emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

from utility electrical power generation sources by approximately 8.45 

million tons from the 1980 level of 

17.4 million tons, achieving and maintaining the acid rain statutory SO2 

emissions cap of 8.95 million tons. 
14 

nitrogen deposition and mean total 

ambient nitrate concentration by 15 

percent from 1990 monitored levels 

of up to 11 kilograms per hectare for 

total nitrogen deposition and 4.0 

micrograms per cubic meter for mean 

total ambient nitrate concentration. 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

ACHIEVING HEALTHIER OUTDOOR AIR 

Our strategy for reducing outdoor air 

pollution is based on collaboration at the 

federal, state, and local levels. States are 

primarily responsible for maintaining and 

improving air quality and meeting national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

established by EPA. State programs develop 

emission inventories, operate and maintain 

air monitoring networks, perform air quality 

modeling, and develop State Implementation 

Plans (SIPs) that lay out control strategies for 

improving air quality and meeting NAAQS. 

implement programs to reduce pollut

the most widespread and significant s

of air pollution: mobile sources, such 

trucks, buses, and construction equip

and stationary sources, such as power 

oil refineries, chemical plants, and dr

ing operations. In addition, we addre

national level air quality issues that e

the reach of state and tribal authoriti

as interstate transport of pollutants. 

EPA is authorized to implement a

programs in Indian country; however, 

tribes may be authorized to develop an

ment their own Clean Air Act progra

are working with tribes to acquire mo

better data on the quality of air on tri

lands,3 build tribal capacity to adminis

programs in Indian country, and estab

mechanisms that will enable EPA and 

work effectively with tribal governme

regional and national policy issues. W

assist any tribe interested in making a 

nation on its air quality by providing d

data analysis, and technical support. 

We will continue to involve com

civic organizations, and other stakeho

designing programs to achieve health

door air. We will work closely with th

National Environmental Justice Advi

Council, community-based organizati

other stakeholders (including schools 

versities, environmental organization

business and industry groups) to ensu

environmental justice is an integral p

programs, policies, and activities. To 

this commitment, we will develop ba

data that will enable us to track our p

in addressing environmental justice c
pollution. We are committed to commonsense, cost-effective solutions that result in 

cleaner air, and we will continue to integrate 

critical scientific assessment with policy, regulatory, and non-regulatory activities. Using 

mathematical models, data from ambient monitoring and deposition monitoring, and other 

information, we will work with states and 

tribes to evaluate control options, control 

plans, the impacts of alternative emission scenarios, and the effect of federal rules and other 

control strategies. We will continue to conduct 

exposure and risk assessments on criteria and 

hazardous air pollutants, integrating monitoring and modeling information to characterize 

the impacts of sources of air pollution within 

and outside of the United States. 

OZONE AND PARTICULATE MATTER 

To improve air quality, EPA will continue 

to focus on implementing the fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) standards and 8-hour ozone 

standards. In support of state efforts, we will 

develop federal programs for mobile and stationary sources that achieve large, 

nationwide, cost-effective reductions in emissions of PM and its contributors (SO2, NOX, 

and elemental and organic carbon), ozoneforming NOX, and volatile organic 

compounds. We will work with states to 

reduce emissions of PM and ozone precursors 

and mercury from electric-generating units 

and to better integrate ozone and PM efforts, 

for example, by improving emission inventories, developing comprehensive air quality 

modeling approaches, controlling sources of 

precursors common to both, and coordinating 

power plant operators to find the best, fastest, 

and most efficient ways to make the required 

emission reductions. We expect CAIR to 

reduce SO2 emissions by 4.3 million tons 

(more than 70 percent) and NOX emissions 

by 1.7 million tons (more than 60 percent) 

from 2003 levels. As we implement CAIR, 

we will also continue to support passage of 

the President’s Clear Skies legislation, which 

would achieve broader reductions of SO2 and 

NOX and provide more certainty for industry 

and state and local air quality planners. 

CAIR is an important component of 

EPA’s plan to help states in the eastern 

United States meet EPA’s health-based air 

quality standards. Through CAIR and other 

Clean Air Act programs, 92 of the 108 areas 

that had not met the standards for 8-hour 

ozone and 17 of the 36 areas that had not 

met the standards for PM2.5 as of April 2005 

will achieve these health-based national standards by 2011. We estimate that by 2015 air 

quality improvements from CAIR and other 

Clean Air Act programs could generate more 

than $100 billion in health and visibility 

Significant Cuts in NOX and SO2 Power 

Plant Emissions Projected with CAIR 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 202

SO 

NOx 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 202

2 

Projected, w/CAIR 

Source: EPA 

Emissions in Million Tons 
pp

and other pollutants, the campaign also targets 

diesel emissions from school buses. By regulating 

new engines more stringently and building partnerships to address the existing diesel fleet, the 

NCDC furthers EPA’s efforts to encourage environmental stewardship. 

benefits per year. We expect that by reducing 

sulfur and nitrogen deposition, these programs will also reduce the incidence of 

chronically acidic lakes and streams. 

Working with our partners, EPA will 

implement a series of national programs to 

dramatically reduce emissions from a wide 

range of mobile sources: 

•	 The Tier 2 Vehicle and Gasoline 

Sulfur Program, to be fully implemented by 2009, will make new cars, 

sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, 

and vans 77 to 95 percent cleaner 

than 2003 models, while reducing sulfur levels in gasoline by 90 percent. 

•	 Our Clean Diesel Truck and Bus 

Program will require that, beginning 

in 2007, all new highway diesel 

engines be as much as 95 percent 

cleaner than current models, while 

reducing sulfur levels in highway 

diesel fuel by more than 97 percent. 

•	 The Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule 

will cut emission levels from construction, agricultural, and industrial 

diesel-powered equipment by more 

than 90 percent, while removing 

99 percent of the sulfur in nonroad 

conduct activities to reduce emission

the 11 million diesel engines already 

For example, we will create cost-effec

diesel-retrofit partnerships to reduce 

PM emissions from older, high-pollut

trucks, buses, and nonroad equipmen

centrating on nonattainment areas an

with sensitive populations and raisin

awareness of the risks diesel emission

health. We will provide grants for ret

replacing, and reducing idling from v

and equipment in the trucking, railro

struction, school bus, and port sector

encourage states and industry to supp

diesel retrofit projects. These innova

tiatives will support states’ efforts to m

national air quality standards. 

Implementing provisions of the E

Policy Act of 2005 will be a major un

ing for EPA. Central to this effort is 

Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) prog

which requires that the U.S. gasoline 

contain specific volumes of renewabl

each calendar year, starting with 4 bi

lons in 2006 and increasing to 7.5 bi

16 
emissions to 15 tons. Like 

CAIR, the CAMR program has AIR TOXICS 

stringent emissions monitoring 

and reporting requirements EPA regulates emis­ modeled after those of the Acid 

sions of 186 toxic air Rain Program. The flexibility pollutants, including diox­ of allowance trading creates in, asbestos, toluene, and financial incentives to look for 

such metals as cadmium, new and low-cost ways to

mercury, chromium, and reduce emissions and improve lead compounds.4 To com­ the effectiveness of pollution plement the national control equipment. standards that address 

major stationary sources of The Clean Air Act also 

air toxics, we are conduct- requires EPA to establish staning national, regional, and 

community-based efforts to reduce multimedia 

and cumulative risks. Characterizing emissions 

and the risks they pose nationally and locally, 

such as in Indian country, will require significant effort. We will need to update the 

science and keep the public informed about 

these issues. Toxic pollutants are of particular 

interest to the environmental justice community because of the proximity of many 

low-income and minority communities to 

sources of toxic emissions, such as industrial 

facilities, waste transfer stations, roadways, 

and bus terminals. To better address areas that 

may suffer disproportionately, EPA will use 

tools and indicators to identify locations with 

potential environmental justice concerns. 

EPA will continue implementing the 

Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), promulgated in May 2005, to permanently cap and 

reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired 

power plants. CAMR establishes standards of 

performance that limit mercury emissions 

from new and existing coal-fired power plants 

dards to reduce emissions of air 

toxics from motor vehicles and their fuels. In 

March 2006, EPA proposed standards to limit 

the benzene content of gasoline and to 

reduce emissions from passenger vehicles and 

portable gasoline containers. EPA will finalize 

this rule in 2007 and implement it in subsequent years. 

EPA continues to develop and refine 

tools, training, handbooks, and information 

to assist our partners in characterizing risks 

from air toxics, and we will work with them 

on strategies for making local decisions to 

reduce those risks. As EPA implements its 

community-based air toxics programs, including Community Action for a Renewed 

Environment (CARE), we will evaluate how 

program activities affect areas with potential 

environmental justice issues. We will work 

with affected communities to address risks 

and track progress. We will use data from our 

national toxics monitoring network and from 

local assessments to better characterize risk 

and assess priorities. 
18

lands. In consultation with tribes, we will 

establish needed federal regulatory authorities 

consistent with EPA’s Indian Policy, and we 

will support tribal traditions and culture. We 

will help tribes develop and manage their 

own air programs, providing technical support, assistance in developing and analyzing 

data, and opportunities to participate in planning and policy-setting at the regional and 

national level. When tribes choose not to 

develop their own programs, EPA will implement air quality programs directly. We will 

continue to support air monitoring in Indian 

country, and we are exploring opportunities 

for mercury and other deposition monitoring. 

EPA has developed new rules for new or 

modified major and minor sources of air pollution in Indian country, and we will work 

with tribes to delegate or implement these 

rules directly in all of Indian country. 

As we develop and implement clean air 

strategies, we will involve the public in 

meaningful ways and work with other federal 

agencies to ensure a coordinated approach. 

parks and wilderness areas). 

Effective partnerships are also ke

sound science efforts. For example, w

continue to collaborate with the U.S

Department of Commerce’s National 

and Atmospheric Administration (N

to develop a consistent, national num

air quality model for short-term air q

forecasts for ozone and PM. EPA will 

work with the international science c

nity to better understand the movem

pollutants in and out of the United S

and to assess potential mitigation stra

Criteria air pollutants, such as oz

fine particles, as well as persistent bio

lative toxins (PBTs), such as mercury

dioxins, and polychlorinated bipheny

(PCBs), can be transported across na

borders. EPA is also working with oth

cies and other governments to addres

transboundary pollution. We will wo

NOAA, the National Aeronautics an

Administration, and other agencies t

track, and forecast the effects of thes

pollutants from international sources

engaging with the international scien

community, we hope to improve our 

standing of international flows and o

for analyzing and evaluating response 

Working through bilateral agreement

international partners, and multilater

international organizations (such as t

United Nations Environment Progra

the Organization for Economic Coop

and Development), we will promote c

building, technology transfer, and oth

gies to reduce foreign sources of pollut
(www.pciaonline.org) is reducing the 

health risks faced by the more than 

2 billion people who burn biomass 

fuels indoors for cooking and heating. 

•	 The Convention on Long-Range 

Transboundary Air Pollution 

(www.unece.org/env/lrtap) and the 

La Paz Agreement (http://air.utep.edu/bca/ 

jac/agreement.html), the U.S.-Canada Air 

Quality Agreement (www.epa.gov/airmarkt/ 

usca/agreement.html), and the North 

American Agreement on Environmental 

Cooperation (www.naaec.gc.ca/eng/ 

agreement/agreement_e.htm). 

OBJECTIVE 1.2: HEALTHIER INDOOR AIR 

THROUGH 2012, WORKING WITH PARTNERS, REDUCE HUMAN HEALTH RISKS BY 

REDUCING EXPOSURE TO INDOOR AIR CONTAMINANTS THROUGH THE PROMOTION OF 

VOLUNTARY ACTIONS BY THE PUBLIC. 

Sub-objective 1.2.1: Radon. By 2012, the 

number of future premature lung cancer 

deaths prevented annually through lowered 

radon exposure will increase to 1,250 from 

the 1997 baseline of 285 future premature 

lung cancer deaths prevented. 

Sub-objective 1.2.2: Asthma. By 2012, the 

number of people taking all essential actions 

to reduce exposure to indoor environmental 

asthma triggers will increase to 6.5 million 

from the 2003 baseline of 3 million. EPA will 

place special emphasis on children and other 

disproportionately impacted populations. 

Sub-objective 1.2.3: Schools. By 2012, the 

number of schools implementing an effective 

indoor air quality management plan will 

increase to 40,000 from the 2002 baseline of 

25,000. 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

ACHIEVING HEALTHIER INDOOR AIR 

Air inside homes, schools, and workplaces can be more polluted than outdoor air 

in the largest and most industrialized cities.5 

Given that people typically spend close to 

90 percent of their time indoors,6 many of us 

may be more at risk from indoor than from 

outdoor air pollution. Moreover, people who 

are apt to spend the most time indoors— 

children, the elderly, and the chronically ill, 

especially those suffering from respiratory or 

cardiovascular disease—may be those most 

susceptible to indoor air pollutants. EPA is 

also concerned about minority, low-income, 

or other populations that may be facing disproportionate risks from indoor air pollution, 

such as secondhand tobacco smoke and other 

asthma triggers. 
20 

public about 

indoor air quality concerns, 

such as radon, 

and actions 

they can take 

to reduce 

potential risks 

in homes, 

schools, and workplaces. We collaborate with 

groups such as health care providers in urban 

areas, who treat children prone to or suffering 

disproportionately from asthma attacks; school 

personnel, who manage school environments; 

county and local environmental health officials; and housing and building organizations. 

indoor air quality problems and deve

baseline from which to measure succ

improving indoor air, including the a

plishments and benefits provided by 

programs as Tribal Effective Asthma 

Management (www.epa.gov/region08

air/iaq/asthma/asthma.html#2) and T

for Schools (www.epa.gov/iaq/schools

index.html). We will work with othe

agencies to provide guidance and ass

on reducing these contaminants in a

communities. Through the State Ind

Radon Grant Program, we will contin

help states and tribes develop and im

effective radon assessment and mitiga

programs. 

OBJECTIVE 1.3: PROTECT THE OZONE LAYER 

BY 2011, TOTAL EFFECTIVE EQUIVALENT STRATOSPHERIC CHLORINE WILL HAV

REACHED ITS PEAK AND BEGUN ITS GRADUAL DECLINE TO A VALUE LESS THAN 

PARTS PER BILLION OF AIR BY VOLUME. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2015, reduce U.S. consumption of 

Class II ozone-depleting substances to 

less than 1,520 tons per year of ozone 

depleting potential from the 2003 

baseline of 9,900 tons per year. 

•	 By 2165, reduce the incidence of 

melanoma skin cancer to 14 new skin 

cancer cases avoided per 100,000 

people from the 1990 baseline of 13.8 

cases avoided per 100,000 people. 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR


PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYE

Scientific evidence amassed over 

3 decades has shown that chlorofluoro

and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (used a

erants, solvents, and for other purpose

halons, (fire-extinguishing agents), m

bromide (a pesticide), and other halog

chemicals used around the world are d

the stratospheric ozone layer. As a res

harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation is 
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,

the 

United States regulates and enforces 

Montreal Protocol provisions domestically. In 

accordance with this international treaty and 

related Clean Air Act requirements,11 EPA 

will continue implementing domestic programs to reduce and control ozone-depleting 

substances (ODS) and enforcing rules on 

their production, import, and emission. Our 

approach combines market-based efforts with 

sector-specific technology guidelines to 

facilitate alternatives to hydrochlorofluorocarbons. We will work in partnership with 

stakeholders to smooth the transition to ODS 

substitutes that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save energy and act on 100 percent 

of the petitions for substitutes within 90 days 

of receipt. To help reduce emissions internationally, we will assist in transferring 

technology to developing countries and work 

with them to accelerate the phase-out of 

ODS. We estimate that from 1990 to 

2165, worldwide phase-out of ODS will save 

6.3 million lives from fatal skin cancer, avoid 

299 million cases of nonfatal skin cancers, 

behavior to reduce UV-related health risks. 

The SunWise program (www.epa.gov/ 

sunwise/), which we expect to grow from 200 

participating kindergarten–grade 8 schools in 

2000 to 20,000 by 2011, will teach thousands 

of school children and adults how to protect 

themselves from overexposure to the sun. 

OBJECTIVE 1.4: RADIATION 

THROUGH 2011, WORKING WITH PARTNERS, MINIMIZE UNNECESSARY RELEASES OF 

RADIATION AND BE PREPARED TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO HUMAN HEALTH AND THE 

ENVIRONMENT SHOULD UNWANTED RELEASES OCCUR. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, 77 percent of the U.S. land 

area will be covered by the RadNet 

ambient radiation air monitoring system. (2001 baseline is 35 percent of 

the U.S. land area.) 

•	 By 2011, the radiation program will 

maintain a 90 percent level of readiness of radiation program personnel 

and assets to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery 

operations. (2005 baseline is a 50 percent level of readiness.) 
22 

ggy p

paredness and response. These responsibilities 

form the core of our strategy to protect the 

public and the environment from unnecessary 

exposure to radiation. We will work with 

states, tribes, and industry to develop innovative training, public information, and 

partnership programs to minimize these exposures. We will also 

conduct radiation

way into non-nuclear facilities, partic

scrap yards, steel mills, and municipa

disposal facilities. We will work with 

International Atomic Energy Agency 

other federal agencies to prevent met

and finished products suspected of ha

radioactive contamination from ente

country. Through partnerships with s

local age

and tribe

risk assessments to will loca

evaluate health secure lo

risks from radiation stolen, o

exposure; determine doned 

appropriate levels radioact

for cleaning up con- sources w

taminated sites; and the Unit

develop radiation States an

protection and risk tigate an

management policy, promote 

guidance, and rules. tices to r

Mining and industria

radioact

processing naturally releases. 

radioactive materiexpand o

als for use in 

medicine, power 

generation, consumer products, and industry 

inevitably generate emissions and waste. EPA 

will provide guidance and training to help 

federal and state agencies prepare for 

emergencies at U.S. nuclear plants, transportation accidents involving shipments of 

radioactive materials, and acts of nuclear 

terrorism. EPA will also develop guidance for 

cleaning up radioactively–contaminated 

Superfund sites. To manage radioactive 

releases and exposures, we will conduct 

health-risk site assessments; risk modeling, 

cleanup, and waste management activities; 

ongoing 

to ensure that tribes receive assistanc

dealing with radon exposures in their 

and schools. 

One of EPA’s major responsibiliti

ed to radiation is certifying that all 

radioactive waste shipped by the U.S

Department of Energy (DOE) to the 

Isolation Pilot Plant is disposed of saf

according to EPA’s standards. We ins

waste generator facilities and biennia

uate DOE’s compliance with applicab

environmental laws and regulations. 
buildings sector (compared to the 2002 level). 

Sub-objective 1.5.2: Industry Sector. By 

2012, 99 MMTCE will be reduced in the 

industry sector (compared to the 2002 level). 

Sub-objective 1.5.3: Transportation Sector. 

By 2012, 15 MMTCE will be reduced in the 

transportation sector (compared to the 

2002 level). 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING 

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 

In 2002, the President announced a U.S. 

climate policy to reduce greenhouse gas 

(GHG) intensity by 18 percent over the next 

decade. EPA's strategy for helping to achieve 

this goal is to collaborate with private and 

public organizations to reduce GHG intensity 

while providing additional benefits, from 

cleaner air to lower energy bills. At the core 

of these efforts are government-industry partnership programs designed to encourage 

consumers, businesses, and organizations to 

make sound investments in energy efficient 

equipment, policies and practices, and transportation choices. 

EPA is collaborating with other federal 

agencies to maximize results under our climate protection programs. In addition to 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions and supporting such EPA goals as clean air, these 

programs can help other agencies achieve 

their strategic goals. For example, EPA and 

the Department of Energy (DOE) jointly 

implement the ENERGY STAR Program to 

and practices 

(www.energystar.gov). 

Not only does 

ENERGY STAR 

support EPA’s objective to reduce GHG 

emissions from 

homes, businesses, 

and industry, it also 

supports DOE’s goal to cost-effectively 

improve energy efficiency (DOE Strategic 

Theme 1: Energy Security). ENERGY STAR 

can also help make housing more affordable 

by delivering energy savings to low-income 

and subsidized areas. We are coordinating our 

ENERGY STAR marketplace activities with 

DOE’s research and development, regulatory 

activities, and technology demonstrations, 

and we are using complementary measures of 

our progress in the buildings sector. 

We will also continue collaborating with 

DOE through EPA’s SmartWay Transport 

Partnership, which works with fleets and the 

trucking and railroad industries to promote 

energy-efficient strategies, such as reducing 

idling, using low-carbon fuels like E85 and 

biodiesel, and reducing PM and NOX emissions (www.epa.gov/smartway). SmartWay 

also supports DOE’s goals for increasing energy diversity and cost-effectively improving 

energy efficiency (DOE Strategic Theme 1: 

Energy Security). To promote efficient, 

energy-saving technologies that reduce GHG, 

NOX, and PM, we are working together to: 

•	 Increase the number of filling stations 

that offer E85 ethanol by leveraging 

market forces, tax incentives, regulations, and state and local efforts. 
24 

To assess progress under these joint 

efforts, EPA is working with other federal 

agencies to adopt complementary measures 

of performance. In one pilot effort, for example, EPA and DOE will be working jointly to 

promote idling technologies that will save 

fuel and to add new fueling stations offering 

E85 ethanol. 

EPA will be managing a number of other 

partnership efforts to inform the marketplace 

and more quickly deploy technology in the 

residential, commercial, and transportation 

sectors: 

•	 Partnerships with the energy, industrial, and agricultural sectors to 

promote technologies and practices 

for reducing methane and other 

potent GHGs (www.epa.gov/nonco2/ 

voluntaryprograms.html). 

•	 The Green Power, Combined Heat 

and Power, and other partnerships to 

encourage developing and purchasing 

clean and renewable energy 

(http://epa.gov/cleanenergy). 

(www.epa.gov/climateleaders

•	 The Clean Energy-Environm

State Partnership to support 

increasing the use of clean en

(www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/ 

stateandlocal/partnership.htm

EPA also promotes internationa

nerships to reduce GHGs and deplo

technologies. Through the Methan

Markets Partnership, we will work w

other countries and the U.S. privat

to reduce global methane emissions

enhance economic growth, promot

security, and improve the environm

using cost-effective methane recovery 

nologies (www.methanetomarkets.org

addition, the United States has joine

Australia, China, India, Japan, and S

Korea in the Asia-Pacific Partnership 

Clean Development and Climate 

(www.asiapacificpartnership.org), wh

advance the President's goal for clean

more efficient technologies and pract

We will also continue to develop 

assess innovative technologies for ach

clean air. We will continue to develo

advanced clean and fuel-efficient aut

technology. We will collaborate with 

private-sector partners to promote th

transfer of technologies to help meet 

more demanding size, performance, d

and towing requirements of sport util

urban delivery vehicles without comp

ing performance, safety, or reductions 

emissions. We will also promote renew

blends with the greatest environmenta

fits to maximize their potential for red

GHG intensity and improving air qua
ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 

EPA’s Air Research Program provides 

information we need to set and implement 

NAAQS and to ensure that residual risks 

associated with exposure to hazardous air pollutants (air toxics) are being reduced. We 

conduct research at EPA laboratories, through 

extramural grants (including five Particulate 

Matter Research Centers), and by co-funded 

partnerships (for instance, with the National 

Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 

and the Health Effects Institute [HEI]). 

We are targeting our air research to 

achieve measurable improvements in two 

areas: reducing uncertainty in the science that 

supports us in setting air standards and reducing uncertainty about the effects of air 

pollutants on human health. To achieve these 

goals, our air research program will focus on: 

Developing data and tools to support NAAQS. 

EPA research will provide new and updated 

data and new methods and models to characterize and estimate source emissions. 

Enhanced air quality models that more accurately reflect meteorological effects and 

improve our ability to forecast air quality 

changes will enable EPA, states, and tribes to 

alert the public to air quality concerns. 

Advances in receptor-based models will more 

accurately identify which source categories 

contribute to ambient concentrations, 

enabling us to target control strategies. 

Research will also investigate technologies 

for addressing multiple pollutants from key 

sources contributing to non-attainment or air 

toxics problems. We will also be developing a 

framework for assessing the impact of 

Understanding the effects of air pollution 

on health. With HEI and other research partners, we are undertaking a systematic 

evaluation of PM attributes that will help us 

understand how exposure to PM and related 

air toxics can affect various aspects of health, 

including pulmonary, cardiovascular, 

immunological, neurological, reproductive, 

and developmental health, and we will focus 

particularly on susceptible populations. 

Linking sources and effects. Research will 

enable us to link health effects more closely 

to specific sources and PM attributes, advancing the state of air pollution science and 

allowing us to better target sources of greatest 

impact and improve control measures and 

strategies to minimize the impact of particle 

and air toxics emissions. This will be the 

major theme of the Particulate Matter 

Centers’ 5-year program. 
26 

quality engineers and scientists. 

However, EPA faces a shortage of staff 

skills to implement new air program requirements, such as CAIR and the Energy Policy 

Act of 2005. For example, to implement 

CAIR we will need to develop the workforce 

EPA will need staff with expertise in 

able fuels, vehicle testing, refinery m

transportation modeling and life-cycl

sis, energy security impacts, and econ

analysis. The recruiting strategy we w

address these gaps includes cooperati

ments with several top engineering c

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 

EPA has made great strides in developing To track our annual progress tow

measures that focus on the environmental research objectives, we will use a num

results of our clean air and global climate objective measures of customer satisf

change work. Our strategic targets directly product impact and quality, and effic

track and measure our annual performance For example, we rely on independent 

goals (APGs), estab- review panel 

lished in EPA’s client survey

Annual Plan and usefulness of 

Budget and reported products, an

on in our annual ses demonstr

Performance and the actual us

Accountability Report. research pro

For instance, the We have 

APGs for reductions our strategic 

in the population- annual meas

weighted ambient environmen

concentration of cators to be 

ozone and PM2.5 pro- in EPA’s fort

grams set annual 2007 Report 

targets based on our 

strategic targets. We have also developed 

annual measures that directly track strategic 

targets for the number of people taking all 

essential actions to reduce exposure to indoor 

environmental asthma and the number of 

schools implementing effective indoor air 

quality management plans. 

Environment

Environmental indicators reflected in 

2006–2011 Strategic Plan include tren

national ambient concentrations and 

sions of criteria air pollutants (and th

precursors, such as ozone and fine pa

matter), mercury point-source emissi
the population-weighted ambient concentration 

targets for ozone and PM2.5, and the toxicityweighted risk reduction goals for air toxics. 

fits of the air and climate change programs, for 

example, by measuring the benefits of reduced 

ultraviolet exposure on human health directly. 

USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS 

AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS 

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY PROGRAM 

In the PART evaluation of the Acid Rain 

Program, OMB recommended that EPA work 

to: (1) overcome statutory limitations that set 

maximum emission reduction targets and 

limit the scope of emissions trading and program benefits; and (2) develop efficiency 

measures based on the full cost of the program. We have addressed the first 

recommendation by promulgating CAIR, 

which is projected to reduce SO2 and NOX 

emissions beyond Title IV and uses a capand-trade approach modeled after the Acid 

Rain Program. We are addressing the second 

recommendation by developing data and 

methods to support efficiency measures that 

reflect industry and EPA costs. 

The National Academy of Sciences evaluated the nation’s air quality management 

system16 and concluded that while emitted 

pollutants have been substantially reduced 

over the past 30 years, further progress is 

hindered by scientific and technical limitations in the current system. To address some 

of these issues, EPA is: (1) developing air 

quality-ecosystem indicators for the future 

tracking of trends in human exposure and 

ecological condition; (2) exploring opportunities to co-locate ambient air monitoring 

and atmospheric deposition monitoring with 

long-term ecological research study sites; and 

(3) improving methods for monitoring atmospheric inputs to ecosystems, such as ambient 

mercury concentrations and mercury deposition. We are also developing and expanding 

the use of high-order health and ecological 

indicators and characterizing the movement of 

air pollutants through ecosystems over time. 
INDOOR AIR 

OMB’s PART assessment has led our 

Indoor Air Program to better quantify the 

relationship between funding levels and 

results, improve transparency by making state 

radon grantee performance data more accessible to the public, and improve the program’s 

efficiency measures to more clearly demonstrate cost effectiveness. 

MOBILE SOURCE–CLEAN AIR 

TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 

As a result of a 2005 PART evaluation, 

the Clean Air Technology (CAT) program is 

developing better performance measures that 

more clearly link program efforts to greenhouse gas reduction potential. 

to te 00PAevauatoot

NAAQS Research Program. 


A committee of air pollution ex

formed under the National Research 

Council completed a series of report

2004 and made three specific recom

tions concerning the management o

scientific research: 

•	 EPA should work toward a h

level of sustained integration 

interaction among the scient

ciplines and among the full r

public and private research fu

organizations. 

•	 Research is needed to develo

stronger tools to compile and 

size the large amounts of new 

information being developed 

research program. 

•	 Sustained and substantially e

management of this program 

accompanied by a continuing 

nism for independent review 

oversight of the program, wil

only way to ensure that this 

ment is being soundly made. 

EPA will include actions and mil

to address these recommendations, as 

recommendations on air research tha

received from BOSC and PART asse

in our revised multiyear plan for air r

28
Concerns around energy supply, economic 

prosperity, national security, and the environment present unprecedented opportunities for 

technological innovation in the marketplace. 

Higher, more volatile energy prices could 

create pressures affecting air quality programs 

and goals. EPA will need to ensure that renewable fuels programs, such as those required 

under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, are 

implemented smoothly. Increases in energy 

prices and the turnover of capital stock in the 

energy sector will provoke interest in new 

and more efficient technologies—many of 

which could improve air quality. EPA will 

need to work with industry to develop and 

deploy these technologies in all economic 

sectors, including transportation and electricity production and end-use. For example, 

as demand for domestic coal resources 

increases, EPA will work with the U.S. 

Department of Energy, coal producers, and 

others to promote development and marketing of new coal technologies that generate 

extremely low air emissions, such as integrated gasification combined cycle (or, more 

States and affecting our ability to achieve our 

public health and environmental standards. 

The effects of international and intercontinental transport are already apparent, and as 

energy use and development rapidly increase 

in Asia and other regions, the United States 

may feel the impact. Decreasing emissions in 

developing countries will not replace the 

need for reducing air pollution emissions 

within the United States. Rather, international efforts will complement our local and 

regional control efforts to protect public 

health and our domestic investments. Thus, 

to achieve our own domestic goals, we will 

need to better understand sources of pollution 

in other countries and work cooperatively to 

decrease these emissions. 

Recent scientific studies indicate that the 

stratospheric ozone layer is likely to take 

longer to heal than previously anticipated.17 

Therefore, we expect more people to be 

exposed to excess UV radiation over a longer 

period. Timely, comprehensive action by all 

nations, including the United States, will be 

more important than ever to restore the 
logical patterns have a very impor

on air quality. For example, high t

tures and bright sunlight can incre

formation of ozone. Wind can car

pollution from one area to anothe

ozone layer and protect people from skin conditions of little or no wind can 

cancer, cataracts, and other illnesses. pollutants to remain in an area an

A number of external factors could to unhealthy levels. We must also 

affect achievement of our strategic goals. We these factors as we develop and im

rely on state, tribal, and local government plans and strategies for achieving 

programs to meet many of our clean air per- taining clean air.


formance targets; however, reduced budgets To learn more go to: www.epa

and resource constraints could impede their futures/perspectives.htm.


NOTES: 

1.	 U.S. EPA. March 2006. Air Emissions Trends—Continued Progress Through 2005. Available online 

www.epa.gov/airtrends/2006/econ-emissions.html: EPA Office of Air and Radiation Web Site. 

Access: April 26, 2006. 

2.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal lands,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being des

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

3.	 Ibid. 

4. 	 Clean Air Act, Title I, Section 112. Available online at: www.epa.gov/air/caa/caa112.txt: EPA Cle

Web Site. Access: April 26, 2006. 

5.	 U.S. EPA. 1987. The Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) Study: Summary and Analysi

Volume I. EPA 600-6-87-002a. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 

6.	 U.S. EPA. 1989. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality, Volume II: Assessment and Control of Ind

Pollution. EPA 400-1-89-001C. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 

7.	 United Nations Environment Programme. 2002. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion. Available 

http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/6v_science%20assess%20panel.asp: UNEP, The Ozone Secreta

Date of Access: April 26, 2006. 

8.	 American Cancer Society Inc. 2006. Cancer Facts and Figures: 2006. No. 500806. Available onlin

www.cancer.org. Access: April 26, 2006. 

30 
13.	 United Nations Environment Programme. 2002. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion. Available online at 

http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/6v_science%20assess%20panel.asp: UNEP, The Ozone Secretariat Web Site. 

Access: April 26, 2006. 

14.	 UV irradiance has increased since the early 1980s by 6 to 14 percent at more than 10 sites distributed over 

mid- and high latitudes of both hemispheres. Information from: United Nations Environment Programme. 

2002. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion. Available online at http://ozone.unep.org/Publications/ 

6v_science%20assess%20panel.asp: UNEP, The Ozone Secretariat Web Site. Access: April 26, 2006. 

15.	 EPA’s climate protection programs contribute to the President's 18 percent GHG emissions intensity reduction 

goal for 2012. The goal requires prevention of more than 100 MMTCE nationwide in 2012 in addition to the 

business-as-usual savings that are expected to occur. Of the 103 MMTCE that EPA programs achieve, 80 

MMTCE, or about 80 percent, count towards that approximate 100 MMTCE increment. The remaining reductions will come from other programs and initiatives. For more information see www.whitehouse.gov/news/ 

releases/2002/02/climatechange.html. 

16.	 National Research Council of the National Academies. 2004. Air Quality Management in the United States. 

Available online at: http://fermat.nap.edu/books/0309089328/html. Access: April 26, 2006. 

17.	 New York Times, December 7, 2005, Scientists Say Recovery of the Ozone Layer may take Longer Than 

Expected, Kenneth Chang. Available online at: www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/science/ 

07ozone.html?ex=1291611600&en=6e8ca9c8549a6f6b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss. 

Access: April 26, 2006. 
GOAL 2:

Clean and Safe 

Water 

Ensure drinking water is safe. 

Restore and maintain oceans, watersheds, and their aquatic ecosystems 

to protect human health, support 

economic and recreational activities, 

and provide healthy habitat for fish, 

plants, and wildlife. 
pg 

Three key strategies will drive progress toward these clean and safe 

water goals: 

•	 Core Programs: Continue effective implementation of core nati

water programs, giving priority to improving water quality monit

and information management, as well as working with state part

to strengthen water quality standards, improve discharge permits, and reduce pollution from diff

“nonpoint” sources. 

•	 Water Infrastructure: Help sustain and secure the network of pipes and treatment facilities 

constitute the nation’s water infrastructure through investments in State Revolving Loan fun

pursuit of innovative financing, local adoption of sustainable management practices, and an 

increased commitment to water efficiency as well as partnerships and technical assistance to 

enhance the abilities of utilities to plan for, prevent, detect, and respond to security threats. 

•	 Watershed Restoration and Protection: Apply a watershed approach to restoring polluted w

across the country, including developing Total Maximum Daily Loads, implementing clean-u

plans on a watershed basis, and promoting innovative, cost-effective practices like water qua

trading and watershed permitting to restore and protect water quality. 

Benjamin H. Grumbles 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Water 

34

Clean and 

Safe Water 

Since the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water industrial sectors now comply with nationally 

Acts were enacted over 3 decades ago, government, discharge regulations. In addition, sustained ef

citizens, and the private sector have worked together implement best management practices have he

to make dramatic progress in improving the quality of runoff of pollutants from diffuse, or “nonpoint

surface water and drinking water. 

OBJECTIVES

Objective 2.1: Protect 

Human Health . . . . . . . . . 36 

Objective 2.2: Protect Water 

Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

Objective 2.3: Enhance 

Science and Research . . . 50 

Cleaner, safer water ha

Thirty years ago, many of the nation’s recreational, ecological, and 

drinking water systems provided water interests in communities acr

to the tap with very limited treatment. nation. The recreation, tou

Drinking water was too often the cause travel industry is one of the 

of illnesses linked to microbiological employers in the country, an

and other contaminants. Today, drink- cant portion of recreational 

ing water systems monitor the quality comes from swimming, boa

of the water they provide and treat fishing, and hunting.2 In ad

water to ensure compliance with stan­ year, more than 180 million 

dards covering a wide range of visit beaches for recreation.3 

contaminants. In addition, efforts to 

protect waters that are sources of drinking water are 

helping to keep drinking water safe. 

Thirty years ago, about two-thirds of the surface 

waters assessed by states were not attaining basic water 

quality goals and were considered polluted.1 Some of the 

nation’s rivers were open sewers posing health risks, and 

many water bodies were so polluted that swimming, fishing, and recreation were impossible. Today, the number 

of polluted waters has been dramatically reduced, and 

many clean waters are getting even healthier. A massive 

investment of federal, state, and local funds has resulted 

in a new generation of sewage treatment. More than 50 

The dramatic restoration of some of the 

most polluted waters has paid large dividends 

enhanced recreation, healthier fisheries, and 

local economies. Many of the nation’s best-k

water pollution problem areas are showing th

of years of restoration efforts. The Cuyahog

once so polluted that it caught fire, is now bu

boats and harbor businesses. Oregon’s Willa

River has been restored to provide swimming

and water sports. In Boston, the Charles Riv

badly polluted, increasingly supports boating 

related recreation. 
partnership approaches to improve water quality 

and protect human health. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/water/. 

OBJECTIVE 2.1: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH 

PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH BY REDUCING EXPOSURE TO CONTAMINANTS IN DRI

WATER (INCLUDING PROTECTING SOURCE WATERS), IN FISH AND SHELLFISH, AN

RECREATIONAL WATERS. 

Sub-objective 2.1.1: Water Safe to Drink. 

By 2011, 91 percent of the population served 

by community water systems will receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based 

drinking water standards through approaches 

including effective treatment and source 

water protection. (2005 baseline: 89 percent.) 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, 90 percent of community 

water systems will provide drinking 

water that meets all applicable 

health-based drinking water standards 

through approaches including 

effective treatment and source water 

protection. (2005 baseline: 89 

percent.) 

•	 By 2011, community water systems 

will provide drinking water that 

meets all applicable health-based 

drinking water standards during 96 

percent of person months (i.e., all 

persons served by community water 

systems times 12 months). (2

baseline: 95.2 percent.) 

•	 By 2011, 86 percent of the p

tion in Indian country4 serve

community water systems wi

drinking water that meets all 

ble health-based drinking wat

standards. (2005 baseline: 86 p

•	 By 2011, minimize risk to pu

health through source water 

tion for 50 percent of commu

water systems and for the ass

62 percent of the population 

by community water systems 

“minimized risk” achieved by 

tial implementation, as determ

the state, of actions in a sourc

protection strategy). (2005 ba

percent of community water s

28 percent of population.) 

•	 By 2015, in coordination wit

federal agencies, reduce by 50 

36 
y , p

and allow increased consumption of fish 

and shellfish, as measured by the following 

strategic targets: 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, reduce the percentage of 

women of childbearing age having 

mercury levels in blood above the 

level of concern to 4.6 percent. (2002 

baseline: 5.7 percent of women of 

childbearing age have mercury blood 

levels above levels of concern identified by the National Health and 

Nutrition Examination Survey 

[NHANES].) 

•	 By 2011, maintain or improve the 

percentage of state-monitored shellfish-growing acres impacted by 

anthropogenic sources that are 

approved or conditionally approved 

for use. (2003 baseline: 65 to 85 percent of the 16.3 million acres of 

state-monitored shellfish-growing 

acres estimated to be impacted by 

anthropogenic sources are approved 

or conditionally approved for use.) 

Sub-objective 2.1.3: Water Safe for 

Swimming. By 2011, improve the quality of 

recreational waters as measured by the 

following strategic targets: 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, the number of waterborne 

disease outbreaks attributable to 

swimming in or other recreational 

Great Lakes waters and other than 

natural surface waters [i.e., pools and 

water parks].) 

•	 By 2011, maintain the percentage of 

days of the beach season that coastal 

and Great Lakes beaches monitored 

by state beach safety programs are 

open and safe for swimming at 96 

percent. (2005 baseline: Beaches 

open 96 percent of the 743,036 days 

of the beach season [i.e., beach season days are equal to 4,025 beaches 

multiplied by variable number of days 

of beach season at each beach].) 
38

ing safe drinking water includes developing 

and implementing drinking water standards, 

supporting infrastructure, protecting waters 

that are a source of drinking water, strengthening the security of water systems, and 

improving access to safe drinking water 

on tribal lands. 

Drinking Water Standards 

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 

directs EPA to establish national standards 

for contaminants in drinking water provided 

to consumers by water systems. EPA sets 

standards based on sound science and rigorous technical and economic analyses. To date, EPA has established standards for 

91 contaminants. 

Over the next several years, EPA will 

conduct the second 6-year National Primary 

Drinking Water Rule Review to help determine whether existing standards need to be 

Ensuring Compliance We will work closely with states 

which have primary enforcement aut

for health-based standards under SDW

tribes, and owners and operators of m

water systems to ensure that America

served by community water systems p

water that meets health-based standa

including new regulations, such as re

rules for cryptosporidium and disinfec

byproducts. To promote compliance w

drinking water standards, states carry 

variety of activities, such as conducti

sanitary surveys of water systems and 

with small systems to improve their c

ties. EPA will work to improve comp

rates by providing guidance, training

technical assistance; ensuring proper 

tion of water system operators; promo

consumer awareness of drinking wate

maintaining the rate of sys

tary surveys and onsite rev

taking appropriate action f

compliance. 

Small community wate

are more likely to have diff

complying with drinking w

standards. Many serve low-

populations and are located 

areas. Water systems such a

serving tribal areas,6 Pacific 

Territories, Alaska Native v

and communities along the 

U.S.-Mexico border face sp

challenges in providing safe 

To support small communit
•

•

•

System is a database that serves as the primary source of information on compliance 

with SDWA requirements. To help states and 

authorized tribes manage their drinking water 

programs, EPA will continue to improve the 

database to ensure that it reflects all applicable drinking water regulatory requirements 

and that data are complete, accurate, timely, 

and consistent. 

Sustainable Infrastructure 

Providing drinking water that meets 

public health standards often requires an 

investment in constructing or maintaining 

infrastructure. The Drinking Water State 

Revolving Fund (DWSRF) provides water 

systems with low-interest loans to improve 

infrastructure. 

According to EPA’s Gap Analysis Report 

(2002), even with financial assistance from 

the DWSRF the country faces a multi-billion-dollar gap in capital infrastructure 

financing over the next 20 years.7 Assuming 

no growth in revenue, the gap is estimated to 

be approximately $100 billion between 2000 

and 2019. Assuming a real rate of growth 

of 3 percent per year, this gap shrinks to a 

point of $45 billion. EPA will continue its 

commitment to provide capitalization grants 

to state DWSRFs until 2018. Low-interest 

loans from the state DWSRFs support needed 

infrastructure improvements. EPA will work 

with states to ensure their SRFs are sustainable and to ensure that, nationally, the 

DWSRF will provide $1.2 billion annually in 

the long term. In addition, EPA will work 

with states to ensure that DWSRF funds are 

Promoting watershed protection on tribal lands 

and implementing source water protection plans. 

Implementing the Public Water System 

Supervision and Underground Injection Control 

programs directly on tribal lands. 

Participating in an interagency effort that 

encourages using available funds to improve 

tribal access to safe drinking water. 

managed effectively, and encourage water system owners and operators to adopt 

sustainable management systems. 

Sources of Drinking Water 

Protecting sources of drinking water, such 

as surface and ground waters, can reduce violations of drinking water standards. We will 

provide training and technical assistance to 

states, tribes, and communities taking measures to prevent or reduce contamination of 

source water, and we will collaborate with 

stakeholders to protect source water. We are 

also protecting ground water that is a source 

of drinking water by working with states, 

tribes, industry, and other stakeholders to 

ensure safe underground injection of waste 

materials. This work includes identifying and 

evaluating risks from Class V shallow wells and 

addressing emerging issues, such as carbon 

sequestration and disposing of drinking water 

treatment residuals. Finally, we will work 

with states and tribes to use Clean Water Act 

authorities to prevent contamination of 

waters that serve as public water supplies and 

will encourage other federal programs to focus 

protection efforts in source water areas. 
now completed, EPA has shifted its focus to homes with access to safe drinking w

reducing risks associated with these vulnera­ basic sanitation. We will support dev

bilities. Our ment 

water security drink

program will water 

provide tools waste

and assistance facilit

to prevent, in Ind

detect, count

respond to, Alask

and recover villag

from inten­ set-as

tional acts funds 

and natural the D

disasters; Wate

encourage Clean 

mutual aid State 

agreements Revo

within states Funds 

and regions; as tar

and provide 

training and exercises to improve water 

utilities’ preparedness. 

We are also undertaking two significant 

initiatives: (1) EPA’s Homeland Security 

Sentinel Initiative (formerly known as Water 

Sentinel), which will deploy and test a contamination warning system; and (2) the 

Water Alliance for Threat Reduction, which 

will provide direct water security training to 

drinking water utilities serving more than 

100,000 people. Collectively, these efforts 

will represent a robust approach for addressing the threats, vulnerabilities, and 

consequences facing the water sector. 

grant

We will also work with other fed

agencies that play key roles in addres

this problem, such as the U.S. Depar

of Health and Human Services, Inter

and Agriculture, to coordinate a strat

for improving tribes’ access to water 

sanitation. (Note that projects to imp

infrastructure along the U.S.-Mexico 

Border and in the Pacific Islands will 

increase peoples’ access to safe drinki

water and basic sanitation. They are 

described under Goal 4: Healthy 

Communities and Ecosystems.) 

To learn more go to: www.epa.go

safewater/. 

40 
power pats ad ceratorse ercury s 

then deposited by rainfall onto land and water, 

where it is methylated by bacteria and moves up 

the aquatic food web through fish to people. To 

make more fish safe to eat, EPA is working to 

reduce releases of mercury to the air through 

controls on combustion sources. Federal market-based and other regulatory air programs, for 

example, will reduce electric-generating unit 

emissions of mercury. (See Goal 1: Clean Air 

and Global Climate Change.) 

In addition to reducing mercury emissions, 

EPA is working to improve water and sediment 

quality. We will continue to implement Clean 

Water Act programs designed to reduce discharges from stormwater systems, combined 

sewer overflows, and concentrated animal 

feeding operations and to reduce runoff from 

nonpoint sources. We are also working to 

restore the quality of aquatic sediment in critical water bodies, with special emphasis on the 

Great Lakes. To reduce the potential for future 

sediment contamination, EPA is working with 

its partners to reduce the use of polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs), a major sediment contaminant, in electrical equipment. (See Goal 4: 

Healthy Communities and Ecosystems.) 

A key element of EPA’s strategy for 

making more fish safe to eat is expanding 

information about fish safety and making it 

available to the public. The National Listing 

of Fish Consumption Advisories website, for 

example, allows states and tribes to post their 

advisories and provide information about 

locations, fish affected, and the number of 

meals or amount of fish that a person can 

safely eat. EPA will continue to guide states 

and tribes in monitoring fish safety and 

issuing fish consumption advisories. 

shellfish. States monitor shellfishing waters 

and can restrict harvesting if shellfish are 

unsafe. Such restrictions can be the result of 

poor water quality due to anthropogenic 

activity, such as discharges from sewage treatment plants. Through its surface water 

program, EPA is addressing anthropogenic 

sources that result in such closures. We will 

continue to work with states, FDA, ISSC, 

and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) to increase the 

percentage of shellfishing acres open for harvesting by improving water conditions. 

These agencies have developed an information system that uses state monitoring data 

to pinpoint areas where shellfishing has been 

restricted. This system, now operating in 13 

of 22 shellfishing states, enables EPA and 

states to identify possible sources of pollutants 

restricting the use of shellfishing waters. EPA 

will also use this information to help develop 

watershed plans, implement National Estuary 

Program plans, issue or reissue permits to 

point sources, enforce existing permits, and 

implement controls over polluted runoff. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

waterscience/shellfish/. 
42 

patoges cabe traced to sewage treatet 

plants, malfunctioning septic systems, and 

discharges from storm water systems and animal feeding operations. EPA is implementing 

a three-part strategy to protect public health 

and the quality of the nation’s recreational 

waters. 

First, we will be working with states to 

ensure that state-adopted criteria for 

pathogens and bacteria in waters designated 

for recreational use are current and scientifically sound. (In a related effort, EPA has 

developed new analytic methods for monitoring pathogen levels at beaches and other 

recreational waters.) We will continue to 

work with state, tribal, and local governments 

to deliver core programs of the Clean Water 

Act: developing and implementing Total 

Maximum Daily Loads and implementing the 

combined sewer overflows (CSOs), wh

occur in about 770 communities aroun

country. CSOs can affect the quality o

ational waters by releasing untreated 

wastewater potentially containing high 

of pathogens. EPA, states, and local go

ments are making steady progress towa

reducing overflows under the “CSO Po

Most communities with CSOs have n

implemented basic control measures, a

percent of permittees have adopted sch

for implementing long-term control pl

CSOs. By 2011, permittees will have c

ed long-term control plans and EPA an

will be monitoring progress toward ful

menting the controls called for in thes

To learn more go to: www.epa.go

npdes/cso. 

The third element of our strategy 

on public beaches along coastal areas 

Great Lakes. Under the Beaches 

Environmental Assessment and Coas

Health (BEACH) Act, EPA provides 

to state, tribal, and local government

programs to monitor beach water qua

notify the public when bacterial cont

tion poses a risk to swimmers. We wi

continue to expand public access to i

based beach information on our webs

Governments receiving BEACH Act 

will post information on water qualit

monitoring and advisory programs, an

closures, which will enable beach-goe

make informed choices. To learn more go to: www.epa.go

beaches/. 
qy , , 

on a watershed basis. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2012, attain water quality standards for all pollutants and 

impairments in more than 2,250 

water bodies identified in 2002 as not 

attaining standards (cumulative). 

(2002 baseline: 39,798 water bodies 

identified by states as not meeting 

water quality standards. Water bodies 

where mercury is among multiple pollutants causing impairment may be 

counted toward this target when all 

pollutants but mercury attain standards, but must be identified as still 

needing restoration for mercury 

[1,703 impaired water bodies are 

impaired by multiple pollutants 

including mercury, and 6,501 are 

impaired by mercury alone].) 

•	 By 2012, remove at least 5,600 of the 

specific causes of water body impairment identified by states in 2002 

(cumulative). (2002 baseline: 

Estimate of 69,677 specific causes of 

water body impairment identified by 

states.) 

•	 By 2012, improve water quality conditions in 250 impaired watersheds 

nationwide using the watershed 

approach (cumulative). (2002 baseline: 0 watersheds improved of an 

estimated 4,800 impaired watersheds 

of focus having 1 or more water bodies impaired. The watershed 

boundaries for this measure are those 

established at the “12-digit” scale by 

the U.S. Geological Survey [USGS]. 

Watersheds at this scale average 22 

square miles in size. “Improved” 

means that 1 or more of the impairment causes identified in 2002 are 

removed for at least 40 percent of the 

impaired water bodies or impaired 

miles/acres, or there is significant 

watershed-wide improvement, as 

demonstrated by valid scientific 

information, in 1 or more water quality parameters associated with the 

impairments.) 

•	 Through 2012, the condition of the 

nation’s wadeable streams does not 

degrade (i.e., there is no statistically 

significant increase in the percent of 

streams rated “poor” and no statistically significant decrease in the 

streams rated “good”). (2006 baseline: 

Wadeable Stream Survey identifies 

28 percent of streams in good condition; 25 percent in fair condition; 

42 percent in poor condition.) 
44 

tions on tribal waters located where 

water quality has been depressed 

and activities are underway or 

planned to improve water quality, 

out of an estimated 1,661 stations 

operated by tribes.) 

•	 By 2015, in coordination with 

other federal agencies, reduce by 

50 percent the number of homes on 

tribal lands12 lacking access to basic 

sanitation (cumulative). (2003 baseline: Indian Health Service data 

indicate that 8.4 percent of homes 

on tribal lands lack access to basic 

sanitation [i.e., 26,777 homes lacking access out of an estimated 

319,070 homes].) 

National Coastal Condition Report i

tors for water and sediment, coastal h

benthic index, and fish contaminatio

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, at least maintain aq

ecosystem health on the 

“good/fair/poor” scale of the N

Coastal Condition Report in 

Northeast Region. (2004 bas

Northeast rating of 1.8.) 

•	 By 2011, at least maintain aq

ecosystem health on the 

“good/fair/poor” scale of the N

Coastal Condition Report in 

Southeast Region. (2004 bas

Southeast rating of 3.8.) 

•	 By 2011, at least maintain aq

ecosystem health on the 

“good/fair/poor” scale of the N

Coastal Condition Report in 

West Coast Region. (2004 ba

West Coast rating of 2.0.) 

•	 By 2011, at least maintain aq

ecosystem health on the 

“good/fair/poor” scale of the N

Coastal Condition Report in 

Puerto Rico Region. (2004 b

Puerto Rico rating of 1.7.) 

•	 By 2011, 95 percent of active 

material ocean dumping sites 

have achieved environmenta

acceptable conditions (as refl

each site’s management plan a

ured through onsite monitorin

programs). (2005 baseline: 94 
•

•

•

•

governments, and others in three key areas: 

maintaining strong core programs that 

emphasize watershed protection; identifying 

and restoring impaired waters on a watershed 

basis; and investing in water infrastructure 

and strengthening management practices to 

improve the sustainability of water systems. 

Strong Core Programs 

Building on the progress toward clean 

water achieved over the past 30 years, EPA 

is working with states and tribes to implement four critical components of the Clean 

Water Act: scientifically sound water 

quality standards; effective water monitoring; 

strong programs for controlling nonpoint 

sources of pollution; and strong discharge 

permit programs. 

Scientifically sound water quality 

standards are vital to protecting water for 

swimming, public uses, and fish and wildlife, 

and they provide the environmental baselines for water quality programs. EPA 

supports state and tribal programs by providing scientific water quality criteria 

information. For example, we are developing 

or improving criteria for nutrients and 

pathogens in ambient water and determining 

how to address emerging contaminants, such 

as pharmaceuticals and personal care products found in the aquatic environment. We 

will continue to work with states and tribes 

to improve water quality standards and to 

assist them in adopting appropriate designated uses and criteria. We will also work with 

states and tribes to operate and administer 

the standards program effectively. Every 

nation’s rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands. 

Among our top priorities for the next 5 years 

are continuing long-term cooperative EPAstate surveys of water conditions similar to the 

recently completed survey of wadeable streams 

and focusing next on lakes and rivers; implementing state and tribal water-monitoring 

strategies on established schedules; and 

improving water quality data bases. This 

monitoring work will help inform assessments 

of fish tissue contamination and of the 

conditions of coastal waters, ground water, 

and beaches. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

owow/monitoring/. 

IMPLEMENTING CORE PROGRAMS

ON A WATERSHED BASIS

EPA and states are delivering core 

Clean Water Act programs on a watershed basis. For example, we are: 

Issuing watershed discharge permits. 

Implementing water quality trading at 

the watershed level. 

Assessing infrastructure needs by 

watershed. 

Demonstrating watershed scale program integration through targeted 

watershed assistance grants. 

A key component of the Clean Water 

Act is controlling nonpoint sources of pollution. EPA will continue working with states 
••••••••

46 

interests, and we will work with federal partners to ensure that federal resources are 

managed in a coordinated manner. To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

owow/nps/. IMPROV

ING

WAT

ER

Q

UALITYON

T

RIBAL

LA

NDS

To improve and protect water quality on 

tribal lands, EPA is working with tribes to: 

Develop water quality standards and 

monitoring strategies. 

Develop nonpoint pollution programs 

under Section 319 grants. 

Develop water permit programs. 

Develop tribal wetlands programs. 

Develop watershed protection plans. Involve tribes in developing Total 

Maximum Daily Loads. 

Provide Clean Water Indian Set-Aside 

and Alaska Native Villages Sanitation 

Grants to address wastewater infrastructure issues. 

Increase access to basic sanitation and 

safe drinking water. 

The National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) requires point 

sources discharging to the nation’s waters to 

have permits for those discharges and industrial facilities that discharge to sewer systems 

to have pretreatment programs to reduce 

their impact on sewage treatment plants. 

state NPDES programs. 

•	 Continue to support states in 

innovative permit tools. Mom

is building for watershed-base

mitting and pollutant trading

over the next 5 years EPA ex

begin to see the results of ear

in this area. 

•	Work to ensure that permits 

state and local governments 

trol storm water from industr

construction sites, and munic

storm sewers are promptly re

when they expire. 

•	 Ensure that industrial dischar

publicly-owned sewage treatm

works are pretreated effective

will provide tools for states a

ities to work with industrial 

dischargers and will monitor 

centage of significant industr

facilities meeting pretreatmen

requirements. 

•	 Revise rules for discharges fro

Concentrated Animal Feedin

Operations (CAFOs) to refle

findings. We expect that afte

revised rules take effect in 20

mits will be issued promptly, 

CAFOs will begin implemen

nutrient management plans. 

•	 Develop or revise national re

tions addressing key industria

of pollution. EPA will consid

ulgating new wastewater regu

for airport deicing and drinki
contribute to impaired waters. 

•	 Continue working with states and 

sewage treatment plants to improve 

compliance with permit conditions. 

To learn more go to: www.cfpub.epa.gov/ 

npdes/. 

Restore Impaired Waters on a 

Watershed Basis 

In reports to EPA, states identify waters 

as “impaired” when one or more of the uses 

designated in water quality standards is not 

being attained. EPA, states, interstate agencies, and tribes are expanding and 

strengthening efforts to meet our 2012 goal of 

restoring more than 2,250 of the 39,798 

waters that states identified as impaired in 

2002. In a related effort, we are also working 

to restore and protect large-scale ecosystems 

around the country. (See Goal 4: Healthy 

Communities and Ecosystems.) 

Over the next several years, we will continue to work with states to coordinate 

identification of impaired waters and improve 

data on location and causes of impairment. 

Better data will enable EPA and states to identify watersheds where impaired waters are 

clustered and determine likely causes and 

remedies. Improved data will also help states 

refine schedules for developing TMDLs so that 

TMDLs needed to restore a group of impaired 

waters can be coordinated. Developing TMDLs 

on a watershed basis will be cost effective and 

create opportunities for coordinating response 

programs and innovations such as watershedbased permitting and water quality trading. 

Water quality trading is a valuable tool that 

control actions to improve water quality. 

We will also continue working with states 

to develop TMDLs consistent with state 

TMDL development schedules and courtordered deadlines. Since 2000, states and 

EPA have made significant progress in developing and approving TMDLs, and we have 

completed more than 20,000 TMDLs across 

the country. We expect to maintain the current pace of approximately 3,500 TMDLs 

completed and approved per year. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

owow/tmdl/. 

As additional TMDLs are developed to 

support those already in place, the number of 

impaired water bodies and watersheds ready 

for implementing pollution controls will 

increase. EPA and states must carefully define 

and schedule restoration actions resulting 
48

mits—those expired permits that states 

determine have a significant environmental 

impact. A permit might be accorded high priority, for example, if the permitted facility 

were contributing to impaired waters or if the 

permit incorporated new TMDLs and water 

quality standards or had the potential to 

contribute to watershed restoration. EPA 

will ensure that these critical permits are 

issued promptly. 

Support Sustainable Wastewater 

Infrastructure 

Sustaining water and wastewater infrastructure is a critical challenge. Existing 

systems are aging—some have components 

more than 100 years old—and growing, shifting populations require investment in new 

systems. EPA’s Gap Analysis Report (2002) 

estimated that if capital spending for wastewater infrastructure remained at current 

levels, the potential gap in funding between 

2000 and 2019 would be about $120 billion. 

Assuming a real annual rate of growth in revenues of 3 percent, the gap shrinks to $21 

billion. Furthermore, many utilities have not 

focused attention on managing for long-term 

sustainability. To address this challenge, the nation 

must fundamentally change the way it views, 

values, invests in, and manages water infrastructure. All parties will need to collaborate 

to find effective, efficient, and fair solutions; 

EPA is one partner in a larger, cooperative 

effort to address this nationwide infrastructure problem. To help facilitate solutions, 

we have developed a Sustainable 

Infrastructure Strategy, organized around 

four main themes or “pillars:” 

•	 Sustainable Management Pr

We will work with utilities an

ciations to promote sustainab

management practices and fi

national strategy in early 200

•	Water Efficiency: We will d

“WaterSense,” a voluntary pa

ship program modeled after E

Energy Star program, to crea

sumer market for water-effici

products. 

•	 Full Cost Pricing: We will id

the range of approaches used 

rate structures based on full c

ing, and we will develop opti

can share with communities. 

•	 A Watershed Approach: We 

work with utilities, watershed 

zations, and others to provide 

and information that will pro

watershed approach to infras

decisions. 

EPA is developing an Internet-ba

Clean Watersheds Needs Survey (CW

data system that will allow communi

states to enter and update informatio

their pollution prevention and treatm

project needs. CWNS data will be ea

accessible for setting project prioritie

Internet mapping analyses, and other 

es that support infrastructure manage

We are also undertaking a major rese

development initiative to identify wa

infrastructure needs that can be addr

through innovation. 
which may be used to fund projects that support an integrated watershed approach, 

including repairing and upgrading onsite 

treatment systems. As of early 2006, the federal government had invested more than $23 

billion in capitalizing state CWSRFs.13 The 

revolving nature of the funds and substantial 

additions from states have increased that 

investment, cumulatively over the years making $55 billion available for loans.14 We will 

continue our commitment to provide annual 

capitalization grants to CWSRFs until 2011. 

Additionally, we will work with state 

CWSRF programs to maintain their excellent 

fiduciary condition. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/owm/ 

cwfinanceomdex/htm. 

IMPROVE COASTAL AND OCEAN WATERS 

EPA tracks progress in improving coastal 

and ocean waters through the National 

Coastal Condition Report, a cooperative 

National Coastal Condition Report 

uses five indicators to determine the 

condition of coastal waters. EPA and 

other federal agencies will review 

changing conditions and periodically 

issue updated assessments. To support 

this work, we are developing indices 

for measuring the health of coral reefs 

and monitoring compliance with 

environmental requirements at ocean 

dumping sites. 

•	 Reducing vessel discharges. 

Discharges from vessels threaten U.S. 

waters and ecosystems. Ships discharge 

pollutants, and discharges of ballast 

water can spread invasive species, such 

as zebra mussels. We will assess the 

need for discharge standards for cruise 

ships operating in Alaskan waters; 

cooperate with the U.S. Department 

of Defense on establishing discharge 

standards for armed forces vessels; and 

assess our programs to reduce sewage 

discharges. To address the problem of 
50 

will continue to work with NOAA, 

coastal states, and Great Lakes states to 

reduce nonpoint source pollution in 

the “coastal zone.” 

•	 Managing dredged material. Several 

hundred million cubic yards of sediment are dredged from waterways, 

ports, and harbors every year. EPA 

and the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (the Corps) share responsibility for regulating the disposal of 

this sediment. To ensure that sediment is disposed of safely and 

properly, we will work with the Corps 

to evaluate disposal sites, designate 

and monitor sites, and review disposal 

permits. We will also work with states 

and other federal agencies to ensure 

International Maritime Orga

We will use these standards a

mechanism to address invasiv

ic species, harmful antifoulan

water, and marine debris. 

We will coordinate these efforts w

those of other federal agencies, states

and public and private parties. To imp

coastal waters, we must successfully im

ment pollution controls in inland wa

(see Sub-objective 2.2.1). Our progre

also be tied to geographically focused 

such as the National Estuary Program

as ecosystem protection programs. (Se

4: Healthy Communities and Ecosyst

To learn more go to: www.epa.go

oceans/nccr/. 

OBJECTIVE 2.3: ENHANCE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 

BY 2011, CONDUCT LEADING-EDGE, SOUND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH TO SUPPORT 

PROTECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH THROUGH THE REDUCTION OF HUMAN EXPOS

CONTAMINANTS IN DRINKING WATER, FISH AND SHELLFISH, AND RECREATIONA

WATERS AND TO SUPPORT THE PROTECTION OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS—SPECIFI

THE QUALITY OF RIVERS, LAKES, AND STREAMS, AND COASTAL AND OCEAN WA

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 

EPA conducts research dedicated to the 

drinking water and water quality programs, 

and brings to bear additional research on 

human health and ecological issues conducted in support of other programs. (See Goal 4: 

Healthy Communities and Ecosystems.) 

DRINKING WATER RESEARCH PR

The SDWA Amendments of 1996 

EPA to conduct research to strengthen 

entific foundation for standards that li

public exposure to drinking water con

nants. The program’s primary goals foc

developing research products that the 

will use to make regulatory decisions o

date drinking water contaminants and 
sure and monitoring contaminants; study 

contaminant mode-of-action and doseresponse; determine treatment, performance, 

and cost parameters; and study the effects of 

distribution systems on water quality. By providing the science and engineering information 

that we and our partners need, our research 

contributes measurable results that advance our 

efforts to ensure safe drinking water. 

WATER QUALITY RESEARCH PROGRAM 

EPA’s Water Quality Research Program 

(WQRP) priorities reflect the research needs 

of our national water program, regions, states, 

forecasting techniques related to 

designated uses of 

aquatic systems; 

and sustainable watershed technologies. For 

example, WQRP research will help the 

Agency promulgate protective standards; identify contaminants and how they contribute to 

impaired waters; and use tools for restoring and 

protecting the nation’s waters that consider 

point and nonpoint sources of contamination 

and the treatment and beneficial use of 

biosolids. WQRP activity directly supports the 

Agency’s goals for improving water quality and 

will contribute to the environmental outcomes 

we are working to achieve. 

HUMAN CAPITAL 

Over the past 20 years, EPA has delegated significant authority for protecting surface 

water and drinking water to state governments. As a result, our role increasingly is 

one of providing our partners and stakeholders with guidance, assistance, and financial 

and information resources. We will continue 

to be responsible for coordinating national 

water policy and evaluating water programs, 

as well as for directly implementing certain 

programs for some states and tribes. 

Our evolving role in protecting water quality means that our workforce must be competent 

in communication, policy development, and 

managing contracts and assistance agreements, 

as well as in engineering and life science disciplines. EPA’s water program is establishing a 

Workforce Council to review workforce initiatives and advise senior managers on priorities 

for improving quality of work life. 

The water program is also assessing 

the optimal skill mix needed to fulfill 

mission-critical assignments, the distribution 

of tasks among those positions, and expected 

trends in staff retirement. It has formed a 
52 

Recognizing that todays staffers are tomorrow’s leaders, our water program has initiated 

several long-term efforts to provide employees 

Standards Academy, the Watershed A

and the NPDES Permit Writer’s Cour

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 

Most of the strategic targets we have established to achieve our goal of clean and safe 

water are measurable and reportable on an 

annual basis. Using a “bottom up” approach, 

our national water program works closely with 

our regional offices and states to develop annual national targets, which are captured in 

annual national water program guidance. To 

track annual progress toward our research 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE MEASURES

Our water program is participating in an Agencywide effort to develop and strengthen measures to 

ensure that the environmental and public health 

benefits of programs are equitably shared. Under 

our goal for clean and safe water, we will measure 

tribal water systems’ compliance with drinking 

water standards, the condition of tribal waters, and 

tribal access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. 

In the future, our national water program expects to 

be able to use established, Agency-wide criteria that 

identify “environmental justice” areas for which we will 

develop measures of progress in improving drinking 

water safety and restoring impaired waters. EPA will 

strive to deliver program resources so that progress 

toward clean and safe water in these areas is equal to 

or better than progress reported nationwide. 

objective, we use a number of objectiv

ures of customer satisfaction, product i

and quality, and efficiency. 

Using such sources as program 

evaluations and environmental indic

have developed two new strategic tar

related measures that will also be inc

the Agency’s forthcoming Report on t

Environment (ROE).

15 One measure a

the chemical, biological and physical 

tion of wadeable streams; the second 

expresses the mercury blood-levels of 

of child-bearing age, a reflection of th

risk from consuming contaminated fi

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE 

MEASUREMENT 

As we incorporated improved me

this Strategic Plan, we also made a pre

assessment of longer-term opportuniti

improving performance measurement

on this assessment, we will work to ex

and sustain a scientifically—sound, st

ly-valid monitoring regimen to charac

the condition of the nation’s waters, t

advance measurement of water qualit

tions on tribal lands, and to improve 

related to environmental justice. 
national water program guidance to describe 

program progress. These reports include recommendations to improve specific instances 

of poor performance, disseminate “best practices,” and inform the development of future 

annual guidance and strategic plans. Through 

this process, we have identified the need for 

performance improvements such as integrating clean water and drinking water programs, 

reducing data reporting lags in the drinking 

water program, and expediting reviews of 

tribal applications to administer EPA regulatory programs. 

In addition, water program managers visit 

three to four EPA regional offices and great 

water body offices each year to discuss program management and performance. Topics 

include assessing regional performance 

against measures in the Strategic Plan, regional 

water issues identified in regional plans, and 

the program commitments that states and 

tribes make annually in their grant work 

plans. These assessments help identify innovations or “best practices” developed by 

regions, states, tribes, watershed organizations, and others, which can be described in 

water program performance reports and 

shared across the country. 

Water programs are also evaluated periodically by EPA and organizations such as 

EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), the 

Government Accountability Office, the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 

and the National Academy of Sciences. We 

have used the results of such evaluations to 

formulate some of the water program goals 

and strategies presented in this Strategic Plan. 

gram activity measures. EPA responded by 

developing a new measure addressing 

improvement in water quality in “12 digit” 

watersheds and expanding and revising watershed-related program activity measures in its 

annual national water program guidance. The 

new watershed measure addresses smaller geographic areas than did our previous measure 

and is more flexible in that it recognizes 

improvement in water quality as well as full 

restoration of impaired waters. 

In another study which influenced this 

Strategic Plan, OIG evaluated the implementation of programs to protect sources of drinking 

water. Based on OIG’s assessment, our national program and regional managers worked 

with states and tribes to revise and simplify 

measures related to source water protection. 

This effort has helped us better define an 

ambitious and realistic target for implementing source water protection programs by 2011. 
54 

(BOSC) and OMB evaluated the Drinking 

Water Research Program in 2005. BOSC 

found the research to be of high quality and 

To learn more go to: www.epa.go

water/waterplan. 

EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS 

Over the past several years, EPA has 

assessed emerging issues that can affect our 

goals for clean and safe water. Among the 

issues identified were: 

•	 Decaying Water Infrastructure and 

Population Growth: Municipal 

wastewater infrastructure constructed 

in the 1970s and 1980s, and an 

increasing percentage of drinking 

water infrastructure, is nearing the 

end of its useful life. Responding to 

this challenge is complicated 

demands of a steadily growin

lation for drinking water supp

wastewater treatment, and st

water management. EPA is in 

first stages of an innovative, 

based collaboration with stat

municipalities to implement 

strategies to strengthen water 

structure management, inclu

initiatives related to water ef

sustainable management prac

and innovative financing of 

structure. 

•	 Water Scarcity: Demand for 

for municipal and other uses 

growing steadily. Meeting thi

demand while protecting eco

values of aquatic resources w

significant challenge. 

•	 Nanotechnology: The predic

explosion in the use of nanot

ogy offers potential for both 

innovative water treatment m

and harm to aquatic systems 

release of nanoscale devices a

products. 
waters and habitats, fisheries, and 

wetlands is necessary to inform sound 

environmental management and 

protection of these resources. 

•	 Pharmaceuticals in Wastewater: 

More pharmaceutical products of 

more varied types are reaching 

aquatic systems through wastewater 

systems, with the potential for 

unanticipated impacts on ecological 

systems and human health. 

•	 Renewable Energy: As energy needs 

increase and costs from conventional 

sources climb, demand for alternatives, including renewable energy, 

will grow. Recent studies have 

demonstrated the potential for 

sewage treatment plants and animal 

feeding operations to generate significant amounts of renewable energy 

from treatment process by-products. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ocfo/ 

futures/perspectives.htm. 

As we address these emerging water issues 

and continue to strengthen and improve 

current programs, a number of external factors can affect our success. For example, 

much of our progress in achieving our goals 

will depend on maintaining strong partnerships. States, our primary partners in 

implementing clean water and safe drinking 

water programs, are facing budget problems 

and perhaps deficits. EPA recognizes that 

state budget shortfalls are an external factor 

that may limit progress toward clean and 

safe water goals. 

Local governments also play a critical 

role in implementing clean and safe water 

programs. Municipalities and other local 

entities have partnered with states and the 

federal government to finance wastewater 

treatment and drinking water systems, and 

their continued contribution is essential to 

meeting water goals. Municipalities are also 

taking on additional responsibilities for 

addressing storm water and CSOs. In the 

case of the drinking water program, effective 

local management of drinking water systems, 

including protection of source waters, is 

essential to maintaining high rates of compliance with drinking water standards. More 

than 90 percent of the nation’s 52,000 

community water systems are smaller systems 

(serving 10,000 or fewer people) that often 

struggle to provide safe drinking water.

16 

Continued consultation with local 

governments is critical to achieving clean 

and safe water. 

EPA implements programs in Indian 

country, helps build tribes’ capacity to administer clean and safe water programs, and 

works as co-regulators with authorized tribes. 

Tribal resource needs are great, however, and 

unlike states, many tribes are still developing 

programs to administer clean and safe water 

programs. Inadequate progress in developing 

these programs is another factor that could 

limit progress toward our clean water goals. 
Key elements of the national water 

program, including nonpoint source control, 

source water protection, and watershed management, require broad partnerships among 

many federal, state, and local agencies and 

the private sector. Over the next several 

years, building partnerships with the agricultural community (such as USDA, state 

agricultural agencies, and local conservation 

districts) is a top priority for meeting clean 

water goals. We will continue to provide 

water quality data and technical assistance 

that can help USDA target its runoff control 

programs. 

Similarly, we rely on many agencies for 

monitoring data to measure progress toward 

404 program of the Clean Water Act

the Corps acts as the lead federal age

permitting the discharge of dredged o

material and, as part of its civil work

projects, addressing dredged material 

ment issues in U.S. waters. We will c

to work with the U.S. Agency for 

International Development, Departm

State, and other interested stakehold

improve access to safe drinking water 

sanitation worldwide in support of th

Nations Millennium Goals. To this e

will promote the international use of 

Safety Plans as a health-based risk as

tool for improving water systems. 

Finally, all of our coastal and oce

activities are carried out in partnersh

other federal agencies and, in some c

with international, state, local, and p

entities as well. We rely on the effort

U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S

Guard, Alaska and other states, and 

number of cruise ship and environme

nongovernmental organizations to m

wastewater discharges from vessels. 

56 
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is 

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

5.	 Ibid. 

6.	 Ibid. 

7.	 U.S. EPA. 2002. The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis. Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office. 

8.	 United Nations. 2002. Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development: Johannesburg, South Africa, 

26 August – 4 September, 2002. New York, NY: United Nations. 

9.	 U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology. National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories. 

Washington, DC. Available online at http://map1.epa.gov. Access: May 1, 2003. 

10.	 U.S. EPA, April 19, 1994. Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Control Policy. Federal Register Vol. 59, 

No. 75, page 18788. 

11.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal land,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” within this 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is 

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

12.	 Ibid. 

13.	 U.S. EPA. June 2002. CWNIMS National Report. CWSRF Funds Available for Projects, Net Sources. 

Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 

14.	 Ibid. 

15.	 The latest version of the ROE as well as information associated with the new ROE can be found at 

www.epa.gov/indicators/index.htm. 

16.	 U.S. EPA, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Accessing Drinking Water Data in SDWIS/FED 

(Safe Drinking Water Information System/Federal Version). Available online at www.epa.gov/safewater/data/ 

getdata.html. 
GOAL 3
Land 

Preservation 

and 

Restoration 

Preserve and restore the land by using 

innovative waste management practices 

and cleaning up contaminated properties 

to reduce risks posed by releases of 

harmful substances. 
p yp

contaminated land can be a barrier to bringing jobs and revitalization 

community. Disposed wastes also represent a loss of important materia

energy values. 

EPA employs a hierarchy of approaches to protect the land, includ

reducing waste at its source, recycling waste for materials or energy va

managing waste effectively by preventing spills and releases of toxic materials, and cleaning up 

contaminated properties. We are helping develop public-private partnerships to conserve resourc

key areas. Moreover, over the next 5 years, we will establish or update approved controls to prev

dangerous releases at approximately 500 hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal faciliti

also will address 2 long-standing tribal waste management concerns: increasing the number of tr

covered by integrated waste management plans and cleaning up open dumps. 

To reduce and control the risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substa

we plan to maintain a high level of readiness to respond to emergencies, lead or oversee the respo

more than 1,600 hazardous waste removals and reduce by 25 percent the number of gallons of oil 

by facilities subject to Facility Response Plan regulations relative to previous levels. EPA and its 

partners, and responsible parties will remediate contaminated land, reduce risk to the public, and 

enable communities to return properties to beneficial reuse. We will also apply leading-edge scien

research to improve our capability to assess conditions and determine relative risks posed by 

contamination at hazardous waste sites. 

Susan Parker Bodine 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Re

60

Land Preservation 

and Restoration 

Uncontrolled, wastes released on the land can 

migrate—contaminating drinking water, causing illness 

or disease, and threatening healthy ecosystems. EPA is 

working to minimize risks and to preserve and restore 

land using the most effective waste management and 

primary parties for setting standards, making en

tal policy decisions, and managing programs con

federal standards and regulations for reservation

regional offices work directly with them as the re

independent authorities for reservation affairs. 

cleanup methods available. We rely 

on a variety of strategies: reducing 

waste at its source, recycling, 

managing waste to prevent spills and 

releases, and cleaning up contaminated property. We are especially 

concerned about threats to our most 

sensitive populations: children, the 

elderly, and people with chronic 

diseases. 

The Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA)1 and the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

OBJECTIVES

Objective 3.1: Preserve 

Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 

Objective 3.2: Restore 

Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 

Objective 3.3: Enhance 

Science and Research . . . . .72 

We also use authorities p

under the Clean Air Act,3 C

Water Act,4 and Oil Pollutio

19905 to protect against spill

releases of hazardous materi

Controlling the many risks p

accidental and intentional re

harmful substances presents 

cant challenge. To minimize 

risks, EPA integrates preven

paredness, and response effo

conduct spill-prevention acti

keep harmful substances from 

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, 

or Superfund)2 provide the legal authority for most of 

EPA’s work to preserve and restore the land. We use 

Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites and return land to 

productive use. Under RCRA, we work in partnership 

with states and tribes to address risks 

associated with leaking underground storage tanks and 

generation and management of hazardous and 

non-hazardous wastes. Tribal governments are the 

released to the environment. And we continue 

improve our readiness to respond and minimiz

nation and harm to the environment when spil

by coordinating with our partners at all levels 

ment, developing clear authorities, 

training personnel, and providing proper equip

EPA is committed to ensuring environmenta

all people, regardless of race, color, national orig

income. Recognizing that minority and/or low-in

communities frequently may be exposed dispropo
OBJECTIVE 3.1: PRESERVE LAND 

BY 2011, REDUCE ADVERSE EFFECTS TO LAND BY REDUCING WASTE GENERATIO

INCREASING RECYCLING, AND ENSURING PROPER MANAGEMENT OF WASTE AND 

PETROLEUM PRODUCTS AT FACILITIES IN WAYS THAT PREVENT RELEASES. 

Sub-objective 3.1.1: Reduce Waste 

Generation and Increase Recycling. By 

2011, reduce materials use through product 

and process design, and increase materials 

and energy recovery from wastes otherwise 

requiring disposal. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, increase reuse and recycling 

of construction and demolition debris 

by 6 percent from a baseline of 

59 percent in 2003. 

•	 By 2011, increase the use of coal 

combustion ash to 50 percent from 

32 percent in 2001. 

•	 By 2011, increase by 118 the number 

of tribes covered by an integrated 

waste management plan compared to 

FY 2006. 

•	 By 2011, close, clean up, or upgrade 

138 open dumps in Indian country6 

and on other tribal lands7 compared 

to FY 2006. 

Sub-objective 3.1.2: Manage Hazardous 

Wastes and Petroleum Products Properly. 

By 2011, reduce releases to the environment 

by managing hazardous wastes and petroleum 

products properly. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, prevent releases at 

RCRA hazardous waste man

facilities by implementing in

approved controls or updated 

trols. (The universe of facilit

be reassessed in FY 2009. Ho

we currently estimate that th

be about 820 facilities that w

require these controls. The g

500 represents about 60 perc

the universe of 820 facilities.

•	 By 2011, increase the percen

of UST facilities that are in s

cant operational compliance 

both release and detection an

release prevention requireme

71 percent from 66 percent i

62 
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

PRESERVING LAND 

In setting goals for conserving resources 

and managing waste under our Resource 

Conservation Challenge Program, EPA 

has high aspirations for our nation. We are 

striving for a future when materials once considered wastes suitable only for landfills will 

be continually reused and recycled, when 

“industrial ecology” will be the mantra of 

corporate executives across the nation, and 

when our landfills will become obsolete.8 To 

lead this move toward sustainability, we are 

establishing a national challenge to recycle 

40 percent of our municipal solid waste by 

2011.9 Meeting this challenge will take the 

combined efforts of all levels of government, 

large and small businesses, and dedicated 

citizens. It will mean that we have reached a 

milestone on the path to a future when we 

produce no waste at all. 

We will work with stakeholders to establish 

effective strategic targets that benchmark and 

quantify our environmental progress toward 

sustainable resource conservation. These 

targets will provide a vivid picture of the significant environmental and economic benefits of 

reducing, reusing, and recycling materials. 

Under our Resource Conservation Challenge, 

we have set new targets for recycling construction and demolition debris and for using coal 

combustion ash rather than disposing of it. In 

the coming years, we will focus on developing a 

target or targets that contribute to the national 

40 percent municipal solid waste recycling 

challenge, and we will be developing broader 

We are 

establishing and 

expanding 

partnerships with 

industry, states, 

and other entities 

to reduce waste 

generation and 

develop and 

deliver tools 

that will help 

businesses, manufacturers, and 

consumers prevent waste and increase recycling. Our WasteWise and Coal Combustion 

Products Partnership programs, for example, 

capitalize on voluntary efforts to reduce waste 

and increase recycling and serve as models for 

new alliances between agencies, industries, 

and businesses. 

For more information go to: 

www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/reduce/ 

wastewise/about/index.htm and www.epa.gov/ 

epaoswer/osw/conserve/c2p2/index.htm. 

We will continue to support our tribal 

partners in improving practices for managing 

solid waste on Indian lands.10 EPA is responsible for implementing RCRA hazardous waste 

and UST programs directly in Indian country. 

Recognizing the challenges unique to tribal 

lands, we will work with tribes on a government-to-government basis in a way that 

affirms our federal trust responsibility to the 

572 federally-recognized tribal governments 

and acknowledges the importance of conserving natural resources for cultural uses. To 

upgrade tribes solid waste management 
64 

is considered “upgraded” when modified so 

that it meets such criteria.11 Over the next 

5 years, EPA will build on the work of the 

National Interagency Workgroup, which 

annually contributes funding to the Solid Waste Assistance Grant Program for tribes, 

and we will forge partnerships with other 

federal agencies to identify and resolve waste 

problems in Indian country and on other 

tribal lands. STIMULATING 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

DEVELOPMENT, PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP, 

AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES 

A key strategy for reducing waste is 

developing infrastructure that will make it 

easier for industry, businesses, and consumers 

to reduce the waste they generate, to acquire 

and use recycled materials, and to purchase 

collaboration because key industries 

states recognize the environmental b

to be derived from reducing waste. 

Similarly, our new GreenScapes partn

www.epa.gov/greenscapes will increas

end-markets for compost while teach

homeowners how to save time, mone

natural resources by reducing and rec

their yard wastes. 

EPA also is working with tribes t

increase recycling and composting at 

public venues such as tribally-owned 

operated casinos, shopping centers, a

amphitheaters. “Recycling on the Go

projects in such locations can preven

recyclable and compostable materials 

reaching landfills. Such projects also 

partnerships and build strong workin

relationships between EPA, tribes, an

local governments. We will continue to promote rec

industrial by-products, concentrating 

three large-quantity material streams

combustion products, construction an

lition debris, and foundry sands. Our 

Combustion Products Partnership 

(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve

index.htm) will prevent waste by enc

the beneficial use of coal combustion 

ucts. EPA’s construction initiative 

(www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve

priorities/bene-use.htm) will foster re

of industrial materials, including con

and demolition debris, in major trans

tion and building construction projec

Through the Green Highways Initiat

(http://www.greenhighways.org/), we 

collaborate with government, busine
recycling technologies and ways to obtain 

energy or products from waste. For example, 

through bioreactor technology, which accelerates stabilization of municipal solid waste, the 

collection of landfill gases containing methane 

offers promise as a source of energy. We will 

continue to support initiatives that revamp 

technologies to reduce or eliminate the use of 

virgin materials, recover energy to produce 

power, and improve waste management. 

PROVIDING EDUCATION, OUTREACH, 

TRAINING, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 

As a result of EPA’s continuing outreach to 

nonprofit organizations, major retailers, 

electronics manufacturers, and other industries, 

messages on conservation, waste prevention, 

and recycling have become more prevalent. 

These messages increase public awareness of 

waste disposal issues, encouraging consumers, 

young people, and underserved communities 

to make smarter, more responsible environmental choices. We will work with our 

partners to encourage students and teachers 

to begin innovative recycling programs, and 

we will develop unique tools and projects to 

promote waste reduction, recycling, and 

neighborhood revitalization in Hispanic and 

African-American communities and on 

Indian lands. By funding training programs 

and providing resources for tribal employees, 

EPA will continue to support the development of tribal waste management programs, 

including adequate and recently-approved, 

integrated solid waste management plans, 

community education and outreach, and 

other cleanup activities. 

management programs will continue working 

with other countries and international agencies to devise efficient, rational solutions and 

voluntary and regulatory initiatives to protect 

the global environment. 

Through our membership on the 

Commission for Environmental Cooperation’s 

Hazardous Waste Task Force, EPA will promote the safe handling of waste imports and 

exports among North American Free Trade 

Agreement countries. This work will improve 

tracking of transboundary hazardous waste 

shipments, strengthen compliance, enhance 

border security, and reduce administrative 

burden and costs to private and government 

agencies in the United States and abroad. 

Under the U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Plan 

(http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/ 

intro.htm), EPA will work with Mexican 

authorities to clean up and prevent tire piles 

and remediate contaminated sites along the 

border. In other international efforts, we will 

work with the Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development to minimize 

waste generation, remove barriers to recycling, and streamline exports and imports of 
under the auspices 

of the International 

Maritime Organization’s environmental committee, participate 

in negotiations (through 2009) to develop a 

new international convention for the safe 

and environmentally sound dismantling and 

recycling of ships. MANAGING HAZARDOUS 

WASTES 

AND 

PETROLEUM PRODUCTS 

A key element of EPA’s strategy for 

managing hazardous wastes that must be 

treated, stored, or disposed is making waste 

management facilities more efficient. Working with our state, tribal, and local 

government partners, we are focusing on 

permitting processes and improving permitting conditions where appropriate. EPA will 

continue to work with authorized states— 

particularly those with a large number of 

facilities lacking initial approved controls—to 

remove obstacles to obtaining permits or putting other approved controls in 

place and to transfer successful 

strategies from other states. Today, while the vast majority of the approximately 650,000 

active USTs have the required 

leak detection and other equipment in place, significant work 

remains to ensure that UST owners and operators maintain and 

operate their systems properly.

14 

RCRA Subtitle I allows state 

UST programs approved by EPA 

programs; strengthen partnerships am

stakeholders; and provide technical a

tance, compliance assistance, and tra

promote and enforce UST facility co

ance. We will work with states on in

approaches and outreach and educati

tools designed to bring more tanks in

compliance. 

The Energy Policy Act, which fo

preventing releases to keep our natio

and water safe, will require major cha

federal and state UST programs. The 

Policy Act extends the LUST Trust F

through 2011; and includes provision

ing inspections, operator training, de

prohibition, secondary containment, 

responsibility, and cleanup of releases 

contain oxygenated fuel additives. EP

states will work closely with tribes, o

eral agencies, tank owners and opera

other stakeholders to bring about the 

dated changes affecting UST facilitie

ultimately increasing compliance and 

preventing UST releases. 

66 
y , 

risks posed by accidental and intentional decisions at 40,491 of 44,700 potenreleases of harmful substances by improving tially hazardous waste sites evaluated 

our nation’s capability to prevent, prepare by EPA to help resolve community 

concerns on whether these sites for, and respond more effectively to these 

emergencies. require long-term cleanup to protect 

public health and the environment 

Strategic Targets and to help determine if they can be 

cleared for possible redevelopment. 

•	 By 2011, achieve and maintain at (By the end of FY 2005, a total of 

least 95 percent of the maximum 38,770 final site assessment decisions 

score on readiness evaluation criteria had been made.)


in each region.


•	 By 2011, complete an additional 975


Superfund-lead hazardous substance


removal actions. (In FY 2005, 175 of


these actions were completed.)


•	 By 2011, oversee and complete an


additional 650 voluntary removal


actions. (In FY 2005, 137 of these


actions were completed.)


•	 By 2011, reduce by 25 percent the


gallons of oil spilled by facilities sub­


ject to Facility Response Plan • By 2011, control all identified 


regulations relative to the 601,000 unacceptable human exposures from 

gallons of oil spilled in 2003. site contamination for current land 

•	 By 2011, inspect (and ensure compli- and/or groundwater use conditions at 

ance at) 90 percent of the estimated approximately 85 percent (1,316) of 

4,200 facilities subject to Facility 1,543 Superfund human exposure 

Response Plan regulations, up from	 sites. (The universe of 1,543 is the 

50 percent in 2004.	 number of National Priorities List 

[NPL] sites with potential human 

exposure pathways as of FY 2005 and Sub-objective 3.2.2: Clean Up and	 includes 172 Superfund federal facility Revitalize Contaminated Land. By 2011, sites. Baseline: By the end of control the risks to human health and the FY 2006, approximately 82 percent environment at contaminated properties or [1,266] of sites had human exposures sites through cleanup, stabilization, or other under control.) By 2011, increase action and make land available for reuse. to 95 percent the high National 
•	 By 2011, control the migration of 

contaminated groundwater through 

engineered remedies, natural processes, 

or other appropriate actions at 

74 percent (1,017) of 1,381 

Superfund groundwater sites. (The 

universe of 1,381 sites is the number of 

NPL sites with groundwater contamination as of FY 2005 and includes 166 

Superfund federal facility sites. 

Baseline: By the end of FY 2005, 

68 percent [937] of sites had groundwater migration under control.) 

By 2011, increase to 80 percent the 

high NCAPS-ranked RCRA facilities 

with migration of contaminated 

groundwater under control. (The 

universe of all facilities that need 

RCRA Corrective Action will be 

finalized by the end of 2007 and will 

include high, medium, and low 

ranked facilities.)17 

that need RCRA Corrective 

will be finalized by the end o

and will include high, mediu

low ranked facilities.)18 By 2

complete construction of rem

approximately 76 percent (1

1,547 Superfund sites. (The 

of 1,547 sites is the total num

sites on the NPL as of FY 20

includes 172 Superfund fede

ity sites. Baseline: By the en

FY 2005, 62 percent or 966 

completed construction.) (N

construction completion is a 

stone which indicates that a

significant construction acti

been completed, even thoug

tional remediation may be n

for all cleanup goals to be m

•	 By 2011, ensure that 36 perc

(345) of 966 final and delete

struction complete NPL sites 

ready for reuse site-wide. (As 

July 2006, 20 percent [195] o

966 final and deleted constru

complete NPL sites, includin

Superfund federal facility site

met EPA’s definition for read

reuse site-wide.) 

Sub-objective 3.2.3: Maximize Pote

Responsible Party Participation at 

Superfund Sites. Through 2011, con

federal resources by ensuring that pot

responsible parties conduct or pay for 

Superfund cleanups whenever possib

68
tions cases for sites with unaddressed 

total past Superfund costs equal to or 

greater than $200,000. 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

RESTORING LAND 

EPA leads the federal effort to reduce risks 

posed by contaminated land by responding to 

releases and potential releases of harmful substances and undertaking cleanups and other 

activities to return land to beneficial use. 

We develop and implement prevention 

measures, improve response capabilities, ensure 

that response and cleanup actions are effective, 

and promote protective, sustainable, and 

productive uses of formerly contaminated 

properties. We collaborate with private 

organizations, communities, businesses, 

and government agencies at every level to 

accomplish these ends. We also work to 

increase public understanding of environmental issues and develop a sense of 

environmental stewardship for land 

that has been returned to beneficial use. 

PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE 

National preparedness is essential to 

ensure that emergency responders are able to 

deal with multiple, large-scale emergencies, 

including those that may involve chemicals, 

oil, biological agents, radiation, or weapons of 

mass destruction. EPA will continue to 

enhance its core emergency response program 

part of the National Incident Coordination 

Team, we will continue to improve mechanisms for coordinating responses to national 

emergencies. Under the Continuity of 

Operations/Continuity of Government program, we will upgrade and test plans, 

facilities, training, and equipment to ensure 

that essential government business can 

continue during a catastrophic emergency. 

And we will expand our National Response 

Team capabilities for coordinating large-scale 

responses with the Department of Homeland 

Security; Federal Emergency Management 

Agency; Federal Bureau of Investigation; 

and other federal, state, and local government agencies. 

We also are 

improving our capability for responding to 

incidents involving 

harmful chemical, oil, 

biological, and radiological substances. 

Each year, EPA 

personnel assess, 

respond to, mitigate, 

and clean up thousands of releases— 

whether accidental, 

deliberate, or naturally 

occurring. These 

range from small 

spills at chemical or 

oil facilities to larger 

accidental releases in 

train and highway 

accidents, and from 
70 

pared for spills that do occur so that oil does 

not reach our nation’s waters. Under the Oil 

Pollution Act,19 we require certain facilities 

to develop Facility Response Plans (FRPs) 

for use in the event of a spill and to 

practice implementing them. At the 

end of FY 2004, EPA had inspected (and 

found in compliance) 50 percent of the estimated 4,200 FRP facilities; over the next 

5 years we will work to ensure at least 

90 percent compliance. CLEANING UP AND REVITALIZING CONTAMINATED SITES 

EPA’s cleanup programs strive to protect 

Americans from risks posed by contaminated 

land; restore the nation’s contaminated land; 

and enable communities safely to return these 

properties to beneficial economic, ecological, 

and social use. We work with our federal, 

state, tribal, and local government partners 

to identify sites and facilities that need 

attention and collaborate to clean them up. 

ple fairly, to provide equal opportuni

participating in cleanup decisions, an

ensure that no population bears a dis

tionate burden or risk. The One Clea

Program reflects our effort to coordin

EPA cleanup programs, yet provides 

bility to accommodate different statu

authorities and approaches. 

All of our cleanup programs inclu

mon elements: initial assessment, sta

(when needed to control actual or po

exposure and protect local population

investigation, selection of appropriat

remedies, implementation and compl

remedies, and promotion of protectiv

uses/reuses. 

Investigating and Assessing Sites. W

partners, we identify the type and ex

contamination and the actual or pote

exposure to people and environment

tors. We use the data we collect to de

risks and to select remedies. To bette

environmental justice concerns and i

areas that may suffer disproportionate 

impacts, we will encourage broader u

improved sample collection techniqu

analytical tools, and indicators. 

Selecting and Implementing Remedie

We select remedies based on such crit

affected media (soil, air, groundwater, 

cleanup objectives, compliance with a

laws, implementation issues, and acce

to state and tribal governments and th

ed communities. Cost and efficiency 

of the overall cleanup process are also 

important. When remedies involve le

contamination in place, EPA will con
For example, the RCRA program has developed a long-term goal of implementing and 

completing construction of final remedies at 

95 percent of all facilities that need RCRA 

corrective action by 2020,20 and we will be 

developing interim annual targets (such as 

our 2011 target of 22 percent) to measure 

progress toward this goal.21 

The Superfund program conducts reviews 

every 5 years to ensure that the remedy is 

functioning as intended and remains protective. Given the many sites moving into the 

post-construction-completion stage, we 

will implement a strategy to manage postconstruction-completion activities and ensure 

that response actions will protect human 

health and the environment for the long 

term (PCC Strategy www.epa.gov/ 

superfund/action/postconstruction). 

A key milestone for all cleanup programs 

is the point at which all cleanup goals for a 

particular remedy or an entire site/facility are 

achieved. This can mean that no contamination is left above levels of concern and that 

the land has no restrictions on its use or that 

site-specific goals that allow restricted uses of 

the property have been met. EPA’s cleanup 

programs have set a national goal of returning 

formerly contaminated sites to long-term, 

sustainable, and productive use. EPA 

will continue to foster revitalization 

(www.epa.gov/oswer/landrevitalization/) by 

developing policies and systems for the safe 

long-term use of remediated land; identifying 

and removing unintended barriers to beneficial reuse of contaminated properties; 

working with the marketplace to make formerly contaminated properties commercially 

MAXIMIZING POTENTIALLY 

RESPONSIBLE PARTY PARTICIPATION 

AT SUPERFUND SITES 

Under Superfund Program enforcement 

authorities, EPA leverages private party 

resources to conduct cleanup actions and to 

reimburse the federal government for federally 

financed cleanups. We will continue to 

pursue two strategies for conserving federal 

funds: “Enforcement First” and cost recovery. 

Under the Enforcement First strategy, EPA 

takes enforcement actions at sites where 

viable, liable potentially responsible parties 

exist, requiring them to pay for or perform 

the cleanups. To ensure that these parties are 

able to meet their cleanup obligations, EPA 

developed a national strategy to assess companies’ compliance with federal financial 

assurance requirements and will implement it 

over the next several years. 

Cost recovery is another way to leverage 

private party resources. Superfund provides 

EPA the authority to compel private parties 

to pay back federal money spent to conduct 

cleanup activities.22 We will continue to 

address 100 percent of the unaddressed past 

costs for statute of limitations cases at sites 

with unaddressed total past Superfund costs 

equal to or greater than $200,000 and to 

report the value of costs recovered. 
72 

EPA will continue to improve its capability to assess environmental conditions and 

determine the relative risks that contaminated land poses to health and the environment. We will ensure that the environmental data 

we collect are of known, documented, and 

acceptable quality by implementing necessary 

field and lab procedures, practices, and 

controls. We will continue to integrate technological advances to enhance our site 

investigation capabilities, implement costeffective remedies, and improve the operation 

and maintenance of existing remedies. In 

addition, we will continue to coordinate with 

other agencies on our land research priorities. 

EPA scientists are developing methods 

for assessing multimedia risks, including 

the Multimedia, Multipathway, and Multireceptor Risk Assessment (3MRA) modeling 

system to support the Hazardous Waste 

Identification Rule. As a part of this effort, 

waste and better understand the risks 

by hazardous constituents during 

recycling operations, disposal, or com

reuse. The 3MRA model will also ev

on a national basis relative risks of va

waste disposal options for use in regu

decision making. We have also plann

research that targets specific material

volume reduction and others for reus

conservation. To support cradle-to-cradle materi

agement, EPA scientists will evaluate 

caps to improve containment technolo

conduct research on operating landfill

bioreactors. This research addresses op

and monitoring parameters and evalu

such risks as increased fugitive emissi

will incorporate our findings in the tr

and technology transfer materials we 

to state permitting officials. 

EPA’s land research program help

erate scientifically defensible, cost-ef

cleanup decisions at complex sites, in 

dance with CERCLA. We are targeti

research to make measurable progress 

managing material streams, conservin

resources, and managing waste and in 

gating and managing contaminated s

Toward these ends, we will focus r

on contaminated sediments, ground w

tamination, site characterization, and 

support to reduce uncertainties in asse

contaminated sediments and develop 

evaluate options for remediation. We 

investigating sediment remedies with 

potential to be more cost-effective th

conventional dredging or capping rem
We will continue ground water 

research—stressing ground water remediation 

of inorganic plumes and ground water-surface 

water assessment strategies—to develop applications for permeable reactive barriers and 

address fate and transport and treatment 

methods for contaminants. Our research on 

dense nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPL) 

source remediation focuses on demonstrating, 

evaluating, and optimizing DNAPL remediation technologies; assessing and predicting 

continue to provide site-specific 

assistance. 

Our research to support the LUST program will provide fate and transport studies 

and information on the effectiveness of remediation alternatives. Research on fate and 

transport and risk management strategies for 

petroleum and non-petroleum oil spills will 

support EPA and its partners in responding to 

oil spill emergencies. 

HUMAN CAPITAL 

EPA’s emergency prevention, preparedness, and response staff are key to the 

Agency’s ability to preserve and restore land. 

We will continue to ensure their readiness 

and protect their health and safety when 

responding to releases of dangerous materials 

or cleaning up contamination by providing 

annual on-scene coordinator readiness training conferences, specialized Incident 

Command System training, health and safety 

materials, and exercises with federal, state, 

and local government agencies. We will also 

enhance the capabilities of our workforce by 

acquiring and maintaining appropriate 

response equipment, providing experience 

with routine cleanup operations, and predeploying responders for national special 

security events. EPA’s Superfund response 

program will develop and maintain the skill 

base needed to achieve its goals through 

numerous training and enhancement 

programs focusing on needs identified in its 

competency gap analysis. 

EPA’s RCRA national waste management, 

waste minimization and recycling, and 

cleanup programs rely on a cadre of technically adept and program management-oriented 

people. Within the RCRA program, our 

development efforts include state-of-the-art 

technical training and focus on maintaining a 

superior level of competency in areas such as 

project management, communications, and 

other skills. These competencies are necessary 

to support our work with the vast array of 

public and private sector partners who are 

interested in waste and materials management. Our recruiting efforts have been 

particularly successful in bringing on high 

quality staff at the entry level to help us build 

a core group of seasoned employees who are 

ready to assume future leadership roles. 
74 

to demonstrate cleanup progress. This measure tracks National Priority List sites where 

construction of the remedy is complete; 

where cleanup goals in the Record of 

Decision have been achieved such that there 

are no unacceptable risks associated with current and reasonably anticipated future uses; 

and where all institutional controls required 

in the Record of Decision have been implemented. These measures will capture the total 

number and acreage of sites for which EPA 

has some level of accountability, the number 

of sites and acres EPA has determined to be 

ready for reuse (or protective of existing 

uses), and whether and how the sites are 

being used (for industrial, commercial, 

residential, or other purposes). 

To track our 

annual progress 

toward our 

research objectives, we will use 

a number of 

objective measures of customer 

satisfaction, product impact and 

quality, and efficiency. For 

example, we rely 

on independent 

expert review 

panel ratings, 

client surveys on the usefulness of our products, and analyses demonstrating the actual 

use of EPA research products. 

Tool (PART) assessments. 

As a result of the self-evaluation 

conducted during the FY 2005 OMB PART process, the Superfund progra

(1) enhanced a key outcome measur

ter communicate progress towards lo

human health; (2) added a new mea

reflect the lasting effects of land clea

restoration; (3) improved reporting o

and long-term performance data to e

accountability; and (4) implemented 

program review process and conduct

first benchmarking study to seek imp

performance, effectiveness and efficie

and protection. The OMB PART for 

Removal Program led to new measur

related targets, as well as a commitm

develop a second long-term outcome 

and at least one annual outcome me

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE MEASU

As we considered revisions and i

ments for this Strategic Plan, we also 

conducted a preliminary assessment 

term opportunities to better articulat

strategic, outcome-oriented commitm

For our land goal, we identified four 

to help guide our efforts to improve o

ures: extent of contaminated land; ex

land restored to potential use; extent 

previously contaminated land in pro

use; and impacts of waste-manageme

on human and environmental condi

These themes will help guide our eff

improve our measures of performanc
track and document key decisions and 

work products. To improve the accuracy 

and reliability of its performance information, the program will evaluate the quality 

of data from key sources. Finally, the 

Superfund program will create a forum that 

allows regional offices to share best practices, resulting in an overall improvement 

in program performance and efficiency. 

In July 2004, EPA’s Science Advisory 

Board (SAB) conducted an advisory 

review of our Contaminated Sites and 

RCRA Multiyear Plans. The Board found 

the plans to be “programmatically and 

scientifically sound” and noted “the remarkable coordination of the program’s research 

with that of the relevant program offices 

and other institutions” and “the judicious 

use of leveraging opportunities to significantly stretch limited resources to meet 

more of the Agency’s needs.” In response to 

SAB recommendations, the research program combined the two multiyear plans into 

one document and more clearly linked 

research activities to program activities 

under Objectives 3.1 and 3.2. 

The SAB also reviewed the 3MRA 

modeling system and reported its findings in 

November 2004. EPA is addressing the 

Board’s recommendations by continuing to 

develop 3MRA modeling system validation 

protocols, modeling system evaluation, and 

additional uncertainty analysis. 

EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS 

A number of emerging technologies 

present potentially important implications for 

waste management strategies and programs. 

Waste to Energy, a technology which uses 

waste materials that are unlikely to be 

recycled as feedstock for energy production, 

has significant implications for energy supply. 

Research is also being conducted on applying 

nanotechnology to remediate hazardous waste 

sites. Using nanomaterials for remediation 

could enable more rapid or cost-effective 

cleanups than do current conventional 

approaches. (More information is available in 

the external peer review draft of EPA’s White 

Paper on Nanotechnology at www.epa.gov/ 

osa/nanotech.htm.) 
severity of spills that occur, as well as the 

capacity of state, local, and tribal agencies to 

address spills. 

EPA’s ability to respond to homeland security incidents is affected by circumstances 

surrounding each event. For instance, if travel 

or communication is severely impeded, our 

response may be delayed or less efficient. In 

the case of a single large-scale incident, our 

resources are likely to be concentrated on 

that response, reducing our ability to address 

other emergency releases that may occur. In 

severe cases, our current emergency response 

workforce and resources may not be sufficient 

to address simultaneous large-scale incidents. 

A number of external factors could also 

substantially affect our ability to achieve our 

objectives for cleanup and prevention. These 

on a strong state presence. 

The Superfund Program was inte

provide permanent site solutions to t

extent practicable. Complications ca

however, when new scientific inform

suggests that cleanup decisions were 

on outdated risk assessments. As app

the Superfund Program must incorpo

emerging science into decision makin

maintaining its commitment to prov

permanent solutions. 

Achieving our waste reduction an

recycling objectives will depend on fed

state, tribal, local government, industr

public participation in partnerships to 

waste generation and increase recyclin

provides national leadership to encour

partnerships and to promote the camp

reduce or reuse waste that would ultim

sent for disposal. However, both dome

foreign economic stresses can adversel

markets for recovered materials. 

Finally, we rely on our partnershi

other federal agencies and tribal gove

to upgrade, clean up, or close open d

Indian country and to provide tribes 

information on modern waste manag

And to achieve our objectives for wa

agement on tribal lands, EPA will co

depend on cooperation and participa

tribes and other federal agencies. 

76 
Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is 

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

7.	 Ibid. 

8.	 Beyond RCRA: Waste and Materials Management in the Year 2020 (www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/vision.htm). 

9.	 In the 2003-2008 Strategic Plan, EPA established a goal of 35 percent recycling of municipal solid waste by 2008. 

EPA will continue to measure progress toward this goal through 2008. 

10.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal lands,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” within this 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is 

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

11.	 U.S. EPA’s Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Criteria are defined in 40 CFR 257 and 258. 

12.	 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Resource Conservation Challenge/Recycling on the 

Go web site: www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/onthego/. 

13.	 Core Performance Elements of the Guidelines for Environmentally Sound Management of Wastes, 

April 24, 2003, Environment Policy Committee, OECD. 

14.	 Memorandum from Cliff Rothenstein, Director, EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks to Underground 

Storage Tank Division Directors in EPA Regions 1-10, dated December 15, 2005. FY 2005 End-of-Year 

Activity Report. 

15.	 42 U.S. Code 6901-6992k. 

16.	 The 2020 RCRA Corrective Action universe will include all facilities that need RCRA corrective action as 

well as those on the current high-priority list, additional facilities that have a permitting obligation, and other 

appropriate and important facilities identified by EPA regions and states. 

17.	 Ibid. 

18.	 Ibid. 

19.	 33 U.S. Code 2701-2761. 

20.	 Beyond RCRA www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/vision.htm. 

21.	 The 2020 RCRA Corrective Action universe will include all facilities that need RCRA corrective action as 

well as those on the current high-priority list, additional facilities that have a permitting obligation, and other 

appropriate and important facilities identified by EPA regions and states. 

22.	 42 U.S. Code 9601-9675. 
GOAL 4
Healthy

Communities 

and Ecosystems 

Protect, sustain, or restore the 

health of people, communities, 

and ecosystems using integrated 

and comprehensive approaches 

and partnerships. 
With a mix of regulatory programs and partnership approaches the 

Agency achieves results in ways that are efficient, innovative and 

sustainable. A key component of Goal 4 is identifying, assessing, and 

reducing the risks presented by the thousands of chemicals and pestici

on which our society and economy have come to depend. EPA contin

to work collaboratively with other nations and international organizat

to identify, develop, and implement policy options to address global 

environmental issues of mutual concern. Following this, EPA strives to 

a community’s capability to make decisions that affect the environmen

EPA’s efforts to share information and provide assistance offers the too

needed to effectively address the myriad aspects of planned developme

redevelopment. These contributions are tailored to circumstances span

the issues of sensitive communities and international cooperation. In 

similar manner, EPA’s ecosystem protection programs encompass a wid

range of approaches that address specific at-risk regional areas, such as 

waterbodies. EPA also works with partners to protect larger categories 

threatened systems, such as estuaries and wetlands. In cooperation wit

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, EPA will assure “no net loss” of wetlan

Science guides EPA’s identification and treatment of emerging issues an

advances our understanding of long-standing human health and environm

challenges. EPA’s research is typically crosscutting, multidisciplinary, and a

cutting edge of environmental science; reflects the dynamic nature of scien

and brings scientific rigor to the characterization of uncertainty and risk. 

Jim Gulliford 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic 

Ben Grumbles 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Water 

George Gray 

Assistant Administrator 

80 Office of Research and Development
Healthy Communities 

and Ecosystems 

Communities and ecosystems are extremely complex 

systems of enormous variety. To protect and sustain 

them, EPA is working to manage environmental risks— 

from risks presented by the pesticides and chemicals on 

which we depend, to threats to our 

watersheds, to hazards posed by polKey to protecting the health of people, com

and ecosystems is identifying, assessing, and re

risks presented by the thousands of chemicals o

our society and economy have come to depend

ensure that chemicals and 

entering the market meet h

lutants entering our homes, schools, 

encourage redevelopment by 

OBJECTIVES

Objective 4.1: Chemical 

and Pesticide Risks . . . . . . .83 

Objective 4.2:

Communities . . . . . . . . . . . .91 

Objective 4.3: Restore 

and Protect Critical 

Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97 

Objective 4.4: Enhance 

Science and Research . . . .109 

safety standards and registe

workplaces, and neighborhoods. We use. And we continue to re

work to protect critical ecosystems, icals already in 

such as wetlands and estuaries, and commerce to reduce potent

collaborate with states and others on Many of EPA’s progra

“place-based” efforts to protect achieve and sustain healthy 

resources such as the Great Lakes, nities and ecosystems are d

Chesapeake Bay, and Gulf of bring tools, resources, and a

Mexico. We direct our to bear at the local level. W

risk-management efforts toward the community capacity by pro

greatest threats in our communities information to understand 

and the most sensitive populations, evaluate the effects of develo

including children, the elderly, Native health and the environment

Americans, and residents of areas 

that may be disproportionately 

exposed to environmental hazards. 

Our strategy for reducing risk calls first for 

preventing pollution at its source. When programs to 

prevent pollution are not viable, however, we strive to 

minimize the waste generated, avoid harming habitat, 

ensure that wastes are disposed of safely, and remediate 

contamination that does occur. 

funds to inventory, assess, 

up the hundreds of thousands of properties tha

doned or unused due to previous pollution. En

homes have access to clean, safe drinking wate

sanitation is a high priority, and we are assistin

communities in addressing local pollution and 

ture challenges. These local and regional initia

rely on collaboration among federal, state, trib
approaches that address specific at-risk 

regional areas—“placed-based initiatives”— 

and larger categories of threatened systems, 

such as estuaries and wetlands. Pollution 

generated locally, combined with pollutants 

carried by rivers and streams or deposited 

from the air, can accumulate in ecosystems 

and degrade them over time. Large water 

bodies, such as the Gulf of Mexico, Great 

Lakes, and Chesapeake Bay, have been 

exposed to substantial pollution over many 

years, and coastal estuaries and wetlands are 

also vulnerable. As the population in coastal 

regions grows, the challenges to preserve and 

protect these important ecosystems increase. Working with our partners and stakeholders, 

we have established special programs to 

protect and restore these unique resources. 

Collaborative efforts are also key to 

enhancing and sustaining environmental 

progress domestically and abroad. EPA 

works with other U.S. government agencies 

and cooperates with other nations and 

international organizations to identify, 

develop, and implement policies for 

addressing environmental problems. 

Through such 

organizations as the 

North American 

Commission on 

Environmental Cooperation, we i

agreements to reduce transbounda

tion and protect the health of citize

borders. We strive to leverage fun

other resources to assist developing 

in managing their natural resource

tecting their citizens’ health. We w

incorporate and support environm

tection provisions in all internation

agreements negotiated by the Unit

Underpinning all of this work 

science. Sound science guides us i

ing and addressing emerging issues 

advances our understanding of lon

human health and environmental 

EPA’s research is at the leading ed

environmental science; it cuts acro

ronmental media and academic di

characterize potential risks and be

EPA conducts “core research” tha

scientific knowledge of human hea

ecology and informs decision maki

further our ability to measure and 

environmental conditions, EPA re

advance monitoring and assessmen

programs and enable such reviews 

Report on the Environment.1 Our 

encourages stewardship and sustai

tions that can prevent pollution by 

environmental protection into nati

economic and individual consume

82 
and ecosystems. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, eliminate or effectively 

manage risks associated with 

100 percent of High Production 

Volume (HPV) chemicals for which 

unreasonable risks have been identified through EPA risk assessments. 

(Baseline: EPA screening of data 

obtained through the HPV Challenge 

Program is commencing in 2006; 

actions to obtain additional information needed to assess risks will 

commence subsequently as chemicals 

are identified as priority concerns 

through the screening process.)2 

•	 Through 2011, ensure that new 

chemicals introduced into commerce 

do not pose unreasonable risks to 

workers, consumers, or the environment. (The FY 2004 and FY 2005 

baseline is 100 percent.)3 

•	 By 2011, achieve a 26 percent 

cumulative reduction of chronic 

human health risk from environmental releases of industrial chemicals in 

commerce since 2001. (Baseline: 

Cumulative reduction reported from 

2002-2003 is 6.6 percent.)4 

•	 By 2010, eliminate childhood lead 

poisoning as a public health concern 

by reducing to 0 the number of cases 

of children (aged 1-5 years) with 

elevated blood lead levels 

(>10ug/dl). (The 1999-2002 baseline 

is 310,000 cases.)5 

lowincome children 15 years old as 

compared to the geometric mean for 

non-low-income children 1-5 years 

old. (The 1991-1994 baseline is 

37 percent.)6 

•	 By 2011, through work with international partners, eliminate the use of 

lead in gasoline in the remaining 

35 countries that still use lead as an 

additive, affecting more than 

700 million people. (Baseline: As of 

January 2006, 35 countries had not 

phased lead out of gasoline.)7 

•	 By 2011, through work with international partners, more than 3 billion 

people will have access to low-sulfur 

fuel in 10 countries, including China, 

India, Mexico and Brazil. (Baseline: 

As of January 2006, none of the 

developing countries had access to 

low-sulfur fuel.)8 
84 

y 011, cotue to atate 

Risk Management Plan (RMP) 

prevention program and further 

reduce by 5 percent the number 

of accidents at RMP facilities. 

(The baseline is an annual average 

of 340 accidents, based on 

RMP program data through 2003.) 

•	 By 2011, reduce by 5 percent the 

consequences of accidents at RMP 

facilities, as measured by injuries, 

fatalities, and property damage. 

(The baseline is an annual average 

of 358 injuries, 13 fatalities, and 

$143.5 million in property damage 

at RMP facilities from 1995-2003.) 

•	 By 2011, vulnerability zones 

surrounding RMP facilities will be 

reduced by 5 percent from the 

2004 baseline, which will result in 

the reduction of risk for more than 

4 million people in the community. 

of those LEPCs), thereby r

the risk to communities fr

potentially devastating eff

chemical accidents. 

Sub-objective 4.1.3: Protect Hum

from Pesticide Risk. Through 201

human health by implementing ou

and taking regulatory actions to en

pesticides continue to be safe and 

when used in accordance with the 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, reduce the conce

pesticides detected in the 

population by 50 percent. 

are determined from 1999

Centers for Disease Contr

Health and Nutrition Exa

Survey [NHANES] data.)1

•	 Through 2011, protect tho

tionally exposed to pestici

improving upon or mainta

rate of 3.5 incidents per 10

potential risk events. (Bas

There were 1,385 occupat

pesticide incidents in 2003 

39,850,000 potential pesti

events/year.)11 

•	 By 2011, improve the hea

who work in or around pe

reaching a 50 percent targ

tion in moderate to severe 

for 6 acutely toxic agricult

cides with the highest inc

chlorpyrifos, diazinon, ma

pyrethrins, 2,4-dichloroph
g g gy 

actions to ensure pesticides continue to be 

safe and available when used in accordance 

with the label. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, reduce the percentage of 

urban watersheds that exceed the 

National Pesticide Program aquatic 

life benchmarks for three key 

pesticides of concern (diazinon, 

chlorpyrifos, and malathion). (The 

1992–2001 baselines as a percentage 

of urban watersheds sampled that 

exceeded benchmarks are: diazinon, 

40 percent; chlorpyrifos, 37 percent; 

and malathion, 30 percent.)13 

•	 By 2011, reduce the percentage of 

agricultural watersheds that exceed 

EPA aquatic life benchmarks for two 

key pesticides (azinphos-methyl and 

chlorpyrifos). (Based on 1992–2001 

data, 18 percent of agricultural 

watersheds sampled exceeded 

benchmarks for azinphos-methyl 

and chlorpyrifos.) 

Sub-objective 4.1.5: Realize the Value from 

Pesticide Availability. Through 2011, ensure 

the public health and socio-economic benefits 

of pesticide availability and use are achieved. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, annually continue to avoid 

$1.5 billion in crop loss by ensuring 

that safe and effective pesticides are 

available to address emergency pest 

infestations.14 

EPA works with other federal agencies, 

states, tribes, industry, environmental groups, 

international entities, and other stakeholders 

to reduce the risks that chemicals and pesticides can present to people, communities, and 

ecosystems. Our strategies for protecting public health and the environment rely heavily 

on these partnerships and on voluntary efforts 

by manufacturers, consumers, and the public. 

REDUCING RISKS 

FROM CHEMICALS 

EPA uses a 

two-pronged strategy to prevent and 

reduce risks posed 

by chemicals and 

microorganisms: 

prevent chemicals 

and organisms that 

pose unreasonable 

risks from entering 

U.S. commerce, and 

screen chemicals 

already in commerce for potential risk. 

The 1977 Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA) requires that EPA review all new 

industrial chemicals and organisms before 

they can be produced or imported and that 

we be notified of significant new uses for 

certain chemicals that we have already 

reviewed.16 We will continue to screen, assess, 

and reduce risks posed by the 66,600 chemicals that were in use before TSCA was 

enacted. Thousands of these chemicals are 

still used today, and nearly 3,000 of them 
Cooperation and Development (OECD) 

Screening Information Data Set program,19 

the international equivalent of our domestic 

HPV Challenge Program. 

Under our New 

childhood lead poisoning as a pub

concern by 2010. Toward that goal

developing a program to address lea

created by renovation, repair, and p

We are also working to eliminate th

in blood l

Chemicals Program, between l

we will continue to and other 

review pre-manufac­ tions and 

ture notices to assess other env

1,300-1,500 new justice co

chemicals or organWe will e

isms each year. continued 

Using advanced to ensure 

screening tools, we resurgenc

can estimate the hood lead 

potential health and occurs. 

environmental haz- Intern

ards of chemicals we will re

released to the envi­ dren’s exp

ronment.20 

We will lead throu

also use these tools global Par

to encourage devel­ for Clean 

opment of safer or 

Vehicles, 

“greener” new chem­ working t

icals. Under our lead from 

Sustainable Futures 

initiative, we provide chemical manufacturers with the same 

screening tools we use to evaluate potential 

health risks and environmental impact.21 As 

more companies voluntarily pre-screen their 

products, we expect to see fewer problematic 

new chemicals, leading to measurable efficiencies in our review efforts. We will 

continue to submit our screening tools and 

models for rigorous peer review, and we will 

update and expand them accordingly. 

reduce su

fuels, and introduce cleaner vehicl

nologies. Reducing sulfur in fuel w

vehicle emissions of particulate ma

addressing a growing public health 

in many countries, particularly in 

oping world. 

EPA is also evaluating emerging 

concerns and taking action to mana

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a p

chemical causing systemic and deve

toxicity in animal studies, has been 

86 
adults, children, and developing fetuses at risk 

for a variety of health problems, including 

developmental delays. The United States has 

been a catalyst for increasing international 

collaboration, building other countries’ 

capacities, and promoting data-sharing to 

characterize and reduce mercury use and 

releases around the world. We will participate 

in demonstration, training, public awareness, 

and information-sharing programs to achieve 

measurable reductions in the commercial and 

manufactured products, coal combustion, 

artisanal and small-scale gold mining, and 

chlor-alkali sectors, which together account 

for up to 80 percent of global anthropogenic 

mercury emissions. 

We will continue our multimedia efforts 

to prevent new persistent, bioaccumulative, 

toxic (PBT) chemicals from entering commerce and to reduce the risks associated with 

PBTs already in use, including mercury and 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). We will 

ensure that PCB waste is stored and disposed 

safely, and we will advise the regulated community on remediating PCB contamination, 

handling PCB disposal applications promptly, 

and overseeing PCB-permitted storage and 

disposal facilities. 

Tribal environmental and health issues 

will continue to be a priority for our chemical program. We will use risk assessment 

methods that take into account the different 

risk profiles of some tribal lifestyles, and 

we will provide information and tools to help 

prevent adverse effects on these sensitive 

populations. EPA will also implement 

lead, asbestos, and PCB programs in tribal 

communities. 

releases. Under our 

Risk Management 

Plan (RMP) Program,23 

we have audited 

approximately 1,800 

RMP facilities and processed more than 

12,000 RMPs since 2003. We will 

continue to analyze data collected under the 

RMP and Emergency Planning and 

Community Right-to-Know24 programs to 

identify the types and locations of facilities 

with the greatest potential for chemical accidents and releases and to identify susceptible 

and sensitive populations that may be at 

higher risk. We will use this information to 

develop voluntary initiatives for high-risk 

facilities and geographic areas. 

In the event that a chemical emergency 

does occur, protecting federal, state, and 

local first responders and on-site personnel 

is critical. EPA provides emergency personnel 

with information they need to take necessary 

precautions and treat individuals who 

may be on the scene. We are collaborating 

with other federal, private, and academic 

organizations to more quickly develop 

Acute Exposure Guideline Levels, which 

emergency responders use in planning and 

mitigation efforts.25 

REDUCING PESTICIDE RISKS TO HEALTH 

EPA’s Pesticide Program screens new 

pesticides before they reach the market and 

ensures that pesticides already in commerce 

are safe.26 Under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
88

residues on food and 

feed, we must balance 

the risks and benefits of 

using the pesticide, consider cumulative and 

aggregate risks, and 

ensure extra protection 

for children. 

Our Pesticide 

Registration Program 

will continue to screen 

pesticide products before 

they enter the market.27 

We will review pesticide data and implement use restrictions 

and instructions needed to ensure that pesticides used according to label directions will 

not result in unreasonable risk. During our 

pre-market review, we will consider human 

health and environmental concerns as well as 

the pesticide’s potential benefits. Under our 

Reregistration Program, we will continue to 

review existing registrations to ensure they 

meet current scientific standards and address 

concerns identified after the original registration.28 In addition, we will meet a provision 

under FQPA (related to the FIFRA requirement for reregistration) for Registration 

Review, a periodic review of existing pesticide registrations to ensure that they meet 

the most current standards. 

EPA began promoting reduced-risk pesticides in 1995 by giving registration priority to 

pesticides that will have low impact on human 

health; low toxicity to non-target birds, fish, 

and plants; low potential for contaminating 

ground water; lower use rates; and low pest 

resistance potential and that will comport with 

Integrated Pest Management approaches.29 

An important part of our Pest

Program is the work done in the fi

ensure that the decisions made du

licensing and re-licensing processe

implemented in pesticide use. An 

1.8 million agricultural workers co

exposed to pesticides, and millions 

uals use pesticides in occupations s

lawn care, healthcare, food prepar

landscape maintenance.30 Each yea

assessments that we conduct yield 

risk-management requirements for 

of pesticides and uses. Working clo

states, tribes, and other federal age

field programs address worker safet

certification and training on using 

hazardous pesticides, protect endan

species, and encourage environme

stewardship. For example, through 

Pesticide Environmental Stewards

Program, we form partnerships wit

users and work with them on pollu

vention strategies and Integrated P

Management techniques that can 

their use of pesticides and lower ri

will continue to reduce the numbe

severity of pesticide exposure incid

promulgating regulations under th

Protection Standard, training and 

pesticide applicators, assessing and 

risks, and developing effective com

tion and outreach programs. Work

our state, tribal, and other regulato

partners, we will acquire informati

pesticide use patterns, geological c

location of endangered species, an

cultural practices that will help us 

and make practical, effective decis
not targets of the pesticide, and we have 

additional responsibilities under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA).31 Under 

FIFRA, we must determine that a pesticide is 

not likely to harm the environment, and we 

may impose risk mitigation measures such as 

restricting uses, denying uses, or requiring 

monitoring of environmental conditions, 

such as effects on water sources.32 

Reduced concentrations of pesticides in 

water sources indicate the efficacy of EPA’s 

risk assessment, management, mitigation, and 

communication activities. Using sampling 

data collected under the U.S. Geological 

Survey’s (USGS) National Water Quality 

Assessment program, we will monitor the 

impact of our regulatory decisions for four 

pesticides of concern—diazinon, chlorpyrifos, 

malathion, and azinphos-methyl—and 

consider whether any additional action is 

necessary.

33 We will work with USGS to 

develop sampling plans and refine goals, and 

we will ask USGS to add additional insecticides to sampling protocols and establish 

baselines for newer products that are 

replacing organophosphates, such as 

synthetic pyrethroids. 

Under ESA, we must ensure that pesticide regulatory decisions will not adversely 

modify critical habitat or jeopardize listed 

species.34 Given approximately 600 active 

ingredients in more than 19,000 products— 

many of which have multiple uses—and 

approximately 1,200 listed species with 

diverse habits and habitat requirements, this 

presents a great challenge. We are working 

with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service 

and National Marine Fisheries Service to 

Malathion

Parathion-methy 

Carbofuran

Disulfoton

Diuron

Methomyl 

Thiobencarb 

Carbaryl 

Dieldrin

Molinate 

Parathion

Phorate 

Propargite 

Terbufos 

Organochlorine Insecticides 

Herbicides 

Insecticides 

0 5 10 15 20 25 95 100 

Percentage of Stream Sites Exceeding 

One or More Benchmarks 

Contributions of individual pesticides to exceedances of aquatic-life benchmarks for water show the significance of 

insecticides in urban streams, particularly diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and malathion during the 1992-2001 study period. 

In agricultural streams, most exceedances of benchmarks were by chlorpyrifos, azinphos-methyl, atrazine, p,p'-DDE, 

and alachlor. 

Pesticides With Concentrations


Greater Than an Aquatic-Life Benchmark,


Urban Streams


Diazinon

Chlorpyrifos 

Malathion

Azinphos-methyl 

Carbaryl 

p,p-DDE 

Diuron

Parathion

Dieldrin

Parathion-methyl 

Organochlorine Insecticides 

Herbicides 

Insecticides 

0 25 50 75 10

Percentage of Stream Sites Exceeding 

One or More Benchmarks 

Contributions of individual pesticides to exceedances of aquatic-life benchmarks for water show the significance of 

insecticides in urban streams, particularly diazinon, chlorpyrifos, and malathion during the 1992-2001 study period. 

In agricultural streams, most exceedances of benchmarks were by chlorpyrifos, azinphos-methyl, atrazine, p,p'-DDE, 

and alachlor. 
REALIZING THE VALUE 

OF PESTICIDE AVAILABILITY 

To protect public health and the environment from risks posed by pesticides and to 

promote safer means of pest control, EPA 

registers pesticides under the authority of 

Section 3 of FIFRA. FIFRA requires us to 

determine that the pesticide will not present 

an unreasonable adverse effect, that is, “any 

unreasonable risk to man or the environment, taking into account the economic, 

social, and environmental costs and benefits 

of the use of any pesticide.” EPA’s registration 

industry to register safe alternative

meet or exceed all current safety s

and offer a high level of protection

In the event of an emergency, 

Section 18 also provides EPA the 

to temporarily exempt certain pest

from registration requirements. W

ensure that, under the very limitin

sions of the exemption, such emer

will not present an unreasonable r

environment. EPA’s timely review 

gency exemptions has avoided an 

$1.5 billion in crop losses per year

Exemptions may be granted for on

events or to respond to emergency 

resulting from new pests on crops 

exemptions are necessary while pr

made towards full registration. In s

EPA’s goal is to complete the more 

and comprehensive unreasonable r

review conducted for pesticide reg

within 3 years. 

ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS 

EPA needs valid tests to assess 

chemicals’ and pesticides’ potentia

endocrine disruption. The Endocr

Disruptor Screening Program will 

validate the screens and tests need

large-scale reviews can take place. 

continue to obtain technical advic

validation of tests from external ex

EPA is also working to minimize t

animals for these tests. 

90 
through use of smart growth strategies in 

30 communities that will achieve significant 

measurable environmental and/or public 

health improvements. (Baselines for criteria 

air pollutants, land consumption, and storm 

water run-off prior to EPA assistance will be 

established for each community.)36 

Sub-objective 4.2.2: Restore Community 

Health Through Collaborative Problem- • By 2011, make an additional 1,125 

Solving. By 2011, 30 communities with acres of brownfields ready for reuse 

potential environmental justice concerns will from the 2006 baseline. (The 2006 

achieve significant measurable environmental baseline will be available in 2007. 

or public health improvement through See “Performance Measurement” 

collaborative problem-solving strategies. section below.) 

(Baseline: In 2006, 20 communities with • By 2011, leverage $12.9 billion 

potential environmental justice concerns (cumulative) in assessment, cleanup, 

are in the process of using collaborative and redevelopment funding at 

problem-solving strategies in efforts to brownfields properties. (FY 2005 

achieve environmental or public health baseline is $7.5B.)38 

improvement. Community-specific 

baselines will be developed by 2008 for Sub-objective 4.2.4: Sustain and Restore assessing improvement.)37 

the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental 

Health. By 2012, sustain and restore the envi- Sub-objective 4.2.3: Assess and Clean Up ronmental health along the U.S.-Mexico 

Brownfields. Working with state, tribal, and border through implementation of the local partners, promote the assessment, “Border 2012” plan. cleanup, and sustainable reuse of brownfields 

properties. Strategic Targets 

Strategic Targets •	 By 2012, achieve a majority of 

currently exceeded water quality 

•	 By 2011, conduct environmental standards in impaired transboundary assessments at 13,900 (cumulative) segments of U.S. surface waters.

properties. (Baseline: As of the (2002 baseline: 17 currently exceeded end of FY 2005, EPA assessed water quality standards were identi­ 7,900 properties.) fied for 10 transboundary segments 

of U.S. surface waters.) 
area that lacked access to wastewater 

sanitation in 2003. (2003 baseline: 

690,723 homes lacked access to 

wastewater sanitation.)40 

•	 By 2012, cleanup five waste sites 

(two abandoned waste tire sites 

and three abandoned hazardous 

waste sites) in the U.S.-Mexico 

border region. 

Sub-objective 4.2.5: Sustain and Restore 

Pacific Island Territories. By 2011, sustain 

and restore the environmental health of the 

U.S. Pacific Island Territories of American 

Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, 95 percent of the population 

in each of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories served by community 

drinking water systems will receive 

drinking water standards th

the year.) 

•	 By 2011, the sewage treatm

in the U.S. Pacific Island 

will comply 90 percent of 

with permit limits for bioc

oxygen demand (BOD) an

suspended solids (TSS). (2

line: The sewage treatmen

the Pacific Island Territori

complied 59 percent of th

the BOD and TSS permit 

•	 By 2011, beaches in each 

U.S. Pacific Island Territo

tored under the Beach Saf

Program will be open and 

swimming 96 percent of d

beach season. (2005 baseli

Beaches were open and sa

64 percent of the 365-day 

season in American Samo

97 percent in the Commo

the Northern Mariana Isla

76 percent in Guam.) 

Sub-objective 4.2.6: Reduce Pers

Organic Pollutant Exposure. By 2

reduce the mean maternal serum b

of persistent organic pollutant (PO

contaminants in indigenous popul

the Arctic.41 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, reduce mean ma

blood levels of polychlorin

biphenyls (PCBs) (measur

92 
populations in the Arctic to 1.1 μg/l. 

(The 2006 calculated baseline mean 

maternal serum level for total 

chlordane was 1.3 μg/l.) 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

SUSTAINING AND RESTORING 

COMMUNITIES 

EPA is committed to sustaining and 

restoring the health of our communities and 

the ecological systems that support them. 

We are working to build capabilities in 

communities across the United States to 

ensure clean and safe water for drinking, 

swimming, and fishing; healthy air; and safe 

management of waste and waste by-products. 

Our work with communities will also include 

efforts to address environmental justice and 

tribal issues and to advance environmental 

stewardship and sustainable practices. 

Achieving these goals will require crossmedia coordination and innovative 

strategies, tailored by community stakeholders. As we expand our knowledge of 

environmental conditions, stressors, and solutions, we expect community-based strategies 

for environmental protection to become even 

more effective. 

EPA’s strategy for community-based 

protection of local natural resources is based 

on four components: 

•	 Inform local decision making. We will 

continue to improve information 

exchange and access to environmental information. 

•	 Provide technical and financial assistance directly to communities. We will 

help neighborhood groups adopt comprehensive, integrated approaches to 

environmental problems. For example, our Community Action for a 

Renewed Environment (CARE) 

Program provides competitive grants 

to help communities create collaborative partnerships to reduce releases 

and minimize exposure to toxins.42 

Through programs like CARE, we 

expect that by 2011 more than 100 

community partnerships will be 

involving the public in addressing 

disproportionate environmental risks. 

Through international free trade 
94 

policies and regulations to ensure 

that federal programs are compatible 

with local efforts and promote overall 

environmental improvement. We 

will continue collaborating with 

other federal agencies to remove 

barriers and create incentives for 

smart growth and integrated environmental management. 

RESTORING HEALTHY COMMUNITIES: 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 

EPA remains committed to environmental justice for all people, regardless of race, 

color, national origin, or income, in accordance with Executive Order 12898, “Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations.”43 Recognizing that minority 

and/or low-income communities may be 

disproportionately exposed to environmental 

hazards and risks, we will work to protect 

mental justice commitments for ei

national priorities: reducing asthm

reducing exposure to air toxics, in

compliance with regulations, redu

incidence of elevated blood lead le

ensuring that fish and shellfish are 

to eat, ensuring that water is safe t

revitalizing brownfields and contam

sites, and using collaborative prob

to address environmental and pub

concerns. We will promote enviro

justice in all aspects of our work b

staff; providing guidance, online to

other resources; sharing informatio

successful strategies; and enhancin

skills in working with community-

organizations. We will continue to 

dispute resolution, facilitation, list

sessions, and other consensus-build

techniques and to convene stakeh

to address environmental and pub

health issues. ASSESSING AND 

CLEANING UP 

BROWNFIELDS 

Brownfields are real properties 

expansion, redevelopment, or reus

complicated by the presence or po

presence of hazardous substances, p

or contaminants. Assessing brownf

help communities understand the r

properties pose and provides the inf

needed to undertake cleanup and re

Cleaning up and reinvesting in thes

may increase local tax bases, facili

growth, utilize existing infrastructu

development pressures off undevel
tion, the Brownfields Revitalization Act 

requires us to consider ”the extent to which 

the grant would address or facilitate the identification and reduction of threats to the 

health or welfare of minority or low-income 

communities, or other sensitive populations,” 

underlining our commitment to environmental justice.44 Our Brownfields Program is also 

developing a methodology to assess the relationship between EPA-funded brownfields 

projects and the sensitive, socio-economically 

disadvantaged communities that they serve. 

EPA will use this methodology to improve 

how the Brownfields Program incorporates 

environmental justice concerns into 

its operations. 

We will continue to provide funds to 

state and tribal governments to establish and 

enhance response programs that oversee the 

majority of brownfields assessments and 

cleanups. These programs provide technical 

oversight and assist property owners; create 

inventories of brownfields sites; and develop 

policies, regulations, and ordinances. Funding 

can also be used to conduct assessment and 

cleanup activities at brownfields properties. 

EPA funding is often critical for operating 

these response programs, particularly for 

tribal governments. 

We will also continue to provide outreach 

and technical assistance to communities confronting brownfields and perform targeted 

assessments at sites where stakeholders are 

seeking federal assistance to identify the 

extent of contamination. Through the 

Brownfields and Land Revitalization 

Technology Support Center,

45 we will help 

streamline site investigations and cleanup 

REDUCING TRANSBOUNDARY THREATS 

ALONG THE U.S.-MEXICO BORDER 

The U.S.-Mexico Border 2012 Program, a 

joint effort between the governments of 

the United States and Mexico, works with the 

10 border states and border communities to 

reduce transboundary threats to improve the 

region’s environmental and ecosystem health.48 

As part of our continuing commitment to 

environmental justice, EPA is working with 

some disadvantaged border communities to 

improve water quality in both the United 

States and Mexico. For decades, raw sewage 

posed a significant public health and 

environmental threat to U.S. and Mexican 

communities. Inadequate water and sewage 

treatment cause border residents to suffer disproportionately from hepatitis A and other 

waterborne diseases. EPA assists communities 

in the U.S.-Mexico border region to increase 

the number of homes with access to safe 
EPA also will POPs t

address health and in the atm

environmental risks and deposi

presented by aban­ borders po

doned tires and uing threat 

hazardous waste. health and 

Piles of waste tires 

breed mosquitoes and other disease-carrying 

organisms, and they are prone to fires that 

are difficult to extinguish. Contaminated 

hazardous waste sites pose acute and longterm risks from metal poisoning. We will 

address key sites on the border, laying the 

foundation for future remediation efforts. To learn more, go to: www.epa.gov/ 

owm/mab/mexican. RESTORING ISLAND 

COMMUNITIES 

The U.S. Pacific Island Territories of 

American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam face 

severe environmental problems. Poor wastewater conveyance and treatment systems that 

contaminate drinking water wells and surface 

waters pose an immediate danger to residents. 

Island beaches, with important recreational, 

economic, and cultural significance, are polluted and frequently placed under advisories. 

EPA is targeting infrastructure and nonpoint source grants toward the most serious 

deficiencies. We are providing technical 

assistance to improve island utilities’ capacity 

for protecting public health and the 

environment. With island and federal 

partners, we will continue to develop 

a Territories Bond Bank that will provide 

ecosystems 

America, especially the Arctic. Tr

foods expose indigenous Arctic po

including those in Alaska, to high

POPs than other populations. Add

international sources can reduce P

in the Arctic, and the United Stat

strong supporter of the Stockholm 

Convention on Persistent Organic 

Pollutants, a global treaty to reduc

which EPA helps to implement.49 

The Arctic Monitoring and A

Program, which documents indige

populations’ exposure to toxics in 

areas, indicates that Russia and Ch

among the largest sources of POPs 

pollutants in the Arctic.50 

We will 

Russia and other Arctic Council m

reduce these pollutants and to coll

store, and dispose of stockpiles of o

pesticides. Based on EPA-led Arct

projects, we estimate that about 24

ric tons of POP pesticides will be r

from unsafe storage and destroyed 

and about 12,000 metric tons of P

be destroyed by 2009.52 

We will co

working to raise awareness about P

capacity to prevent pollution, and 

nologies to protect indigenous Arc

communities. 

96 
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

net increase in wetlands acres with additional 

focus on assessment of wetland condition. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, working with partners, 

achieve a net increase of 100,000 

acres of wetlands per year with 

additional focus on biological and 

functional measures and assessment 

of wetland condition. (2004 baseline: 

32,000 acres annual net wetland 

gain.)53 

•	 By 2011, in partnership with the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

states, and tribes, achieve “no net 

loss” of wetlands each year under the 

Clean Water Act Section 404 

regulatory program, beginning in 

2007. (Baseline: New baseline to 

be determined in 2008.) 

Sub-objective 4.3.2: Facilitate the 

Ecosystem-Scale Restoration of Estuaries of 

National Significance. By 2011, working 

with partners, protect or restore an additional 

(i.e., measuring from 2007 forward) 250,000 

acres of habitat within the study areas for the 

28 estuaries that are part of the National 

Estuary Program. (2005 baseline: 

449,242 acres of habitat protected or 

restored, cumulative from 2002.) 

Sub-objective 4.3.3: Improve the Health of 

the Great Lakes. By 2011, prevent water 

pollution and protect aquatic systems so that 

the overall ecosystem health of the Great 

Lakes is at least 23 points on a 40-point 

Wetlands 

Estuaries 

Great Lakes 

• Chesapeake Bay 

• Gulf of Mexico 

Long Island


Sound


South Florida 

Ecosystem 

Puget Sound 

Basin 

Columbia River 

Basin 

scale. (2005 baseline: Great Lakes rating of 

21.5 on the 40-point scale where the rating 

uses selected Great Lakes State of the Lakes 

Ecosystem indicators based on a 1 to 5 rating 

system for each indicator, where 1 is poor 

and 5 is good.)54 

Strategic Targets: 

•	 Through 2011, maintain or improve 

an average annual 5 percent decline 

for the long-term trend in average 

concentrations of PCBs in whole 

lake trout and walleye samples. 

(1990 baseline: Concentration levels 

at stations in Lakes Superior 

[0.45 ppm], Michigan [2.72 ppm], 

Huron [1.5 ppm], Erie [1.35 ppm] and 

Ontario [2.18 ppm].)55 

•	 Through 2011, maintain or improve 

an average 7 percent annual decline 

for the long-term trend in average 

concentrations of toxic chemicals 

(PCBs) in the air in the Great Lakes 

Basin. (1992 baseline: Concentration 

levels for U.S. stations: Lake Superior 

[100 pg/m3], Lake Michigan [289 

pg/m3

], and Lake Erie [431 pg/m3].)56 
(2005 baseline: Of the 75 million 

yards estimated to need remediation, 

3.7 million yards3 of contaminated 

sediments from the Great Lakes 

have been remediated from 1997 

through 2004.)58 

Sub-objective 4.3.4: Improve the Health of 

the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem. By 2011, 

prevent water pollution and protect aquatic 

systems so that the overall aquatic system 

health of the Chesapeake Bay is improved. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, achieve 45 percent 

(83,250 acres) of the 185,000 acres of 

submerged aquatic vegetation 

necessary to achieve Chesapeake Bay 

water quality standards. (2005 baseline: 39 percent [72,935 acres] of 

submerged aquatic vegetation 

goal achieved.)

•	 By 2011, achieve 59 perce

(95.88 million pounds) of 

mentation goal for nitroge

reduction practices necess

achieve Chesapeake Bay w

standards, expressed as nit

reduction in relation to ac

162.5 million pound reduc

1985 levels (based on long

average hydrology simulat

(2005 baseline: 41 percent 

goal achieved.)61 

•	 By 2011, achieve 74 perce

million pounds) of the imp

tion goal for phosphorus re

practices necessary to achi

Chesapeake Bay water qua

standards, expressed as ph

reduction in relation to ac

14.36 million pound reduc

1985 levels (based on long

average hydrology simulat

(2005 baseline: 58 percent 

phosphorus goal achieved.

•	 By 2011, achieve 74 perce

million tons) of the imple

goal for sediment reductio

necessary to achieve Ches

water quality standards, ex

sediment reduction in rela

achieving a 1.69 million t

reduction from 1985 level

long-term average hydrolo

tions). (2005 baseline: 54 

sediment goal achieved.)63

Photo: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Department of Commerce 

98
•	 By 2011, restore water and habitat 

quality to meet water quality 

standards in 162 impaired segments 

(cumulative) in 13 priority coastal 

areas (2002 baseline: 812 impaired 

segments identified in Section 

303(d) listings.)64 

•	 By 2011, restore, enhance, or protect 

a cumulative 20,000 acres of important coastal and marine habitats. 

(2005 baseline: 16,000 acres restored, 

enhanced, or protected; Gulf of 

Mexico coastal wetland habitats 

include 3,769,370 acres.)65 

•	 By 2015, reduce releases of nutrients 

throughout the Mississippi River 

Basin to reduce the size of the 

hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico 

to less than 5,000 km2

, as measured 

by the 5-year running average of 

the size of the zone. (Baseline: 

2002-2006 running average 

size = 14,944 km2

.)66 

Sub-objective 4.3.6: Restore and Protect 

Long Island Sound. By 2011, prevent water 

pollution, improve water quality, protect 

aquatic systems, and restore the habitat of 

Long Island Sound by working through the 

Long Island Sound Management Study 

Conference partnership. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2014, reduce point source nitrogen discharges to Long Island Sound 

by 58.5 percent as measured by the 

Long Island Sound Nitrogen Total 

Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). 

(TMDL 2000 baseline: 213,151 

lbs/day; 2014 goal: 85,238 lbs/day.)67 

•	 By 2011, reduce the size of hypoxic 

area in Long Island Sound (i.e., 

defined as the area in which the 

long-term average maximum JulySeptember dissolved oxygen level is 

<3mg/l) by 25 percent; reduce average duration of maximum hypoxic 

event by 25 percent. (2005 baseline 

derived from 19-year averages as of 

December 2005;68 size: 203 mi2

; 

duration: 58 days.) 

•	 By 2011, restore or protect an additional 300 acres of coastal habitat, 

including tidal wetlands, dunes, 

riparian buffers, and freshwater wetlands from the 2005 baseline. (2005 

cumulative baseline: 562 acres 

restored and 150 acres protected.)69 

•	 By 2011, reopen an additional 

50 miles of river and stream corridor 

to anadromous fish passage from the 

2005 baseline through removal of 

dams and barriers or installation of 

by-pass structures such as fishways. 

(2005 cumulative baseline: 81 miles 

reopened.)70 
100 

stoy coracover) te orda eys 

National Marine Sanctuary 

(FKNMS) and in the coastal waters 

of Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach 

Counties, Florida, working with all 

stakeholders (federal, state, regional, 

and local). (2005 baseline: Mean 

percent stony coral cover 6.7 percent 

in FKNMS and 5.9 percent in 

Southeast Florida.)71 

•	 Through 2011, beginning in 2008, 

annually maintain the overall health 

and functionality of sea grass beds in 

the FKNMS as measured by the longterm sea grass monitoring project 

that addresses composition and abundance, productivity, and nutrient 

availability. (The 2005 baseline 

index of sea grass health will be 

available in December 2006.)72 

inorganic nitrogen less tha

equal to 0.75 micromolar 

phosphorus less than or eq

to 0.2 micromolar.)73 

•	 Through 2011, beginning 

improve the water quality 

Everglades ecosystem as m

total phosphorus, includin

the 10 parts per billion (pp

phosphorus criterion throu

Everglades Protection Are

and the effluent limits to b

lished for discharges from 

water treatment areas. (20

line: Average annual geom

phosphorus concentration

5 ppb in the Everglades N

Park, 10 ppb in Water Con

3A, 13 ppb in the Loxaha

National Wildlife Refuge, 

18 ppb in Water Conserva

2A; annual average flow- w

total phosphorus discharge

storm water treatment are

from 13 ppb for area 3/4 a

for area 1W.)74 

Sub-objective 4.3.8: Restore and 

the Puget Sound Basin. By 2011, 

water quality, air quality, and mini

adverse impacts of rapid developm

Puget Sound Basin. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, improve water qu

and enable the lifting of h

restrictions in 1,000 acres 
(Baseline: As of January 2006, 

approximately 5,000 acres of 

remaining contaminated sediments 

required some level of 

remediation.)76 

•	 By 2011, restore 3,500 acres of 

tidally- and seasonally-influenced 

estuarine wetlands. (Baseline: A total 

of approximately 45,000 acres of 

intertidal and near-shore habitat 

were identified by state, tribal, and 

local groups as potential restoration 

sites in the 2006 Puget Sound 

Near-Shore Restoration Site 

Inventory Database.)77 

•	 By 2011, reduce total diesel emissions 

in the Puget Sound airshed by 

8 percent through coordinated diesel 

emission mitigation efforts. (Baseline 

will be available in December 2006.)78 

Sub-objective 4.3.9: Restore and Protect 

the Columbia River Basin. By 2011, prevent 

water pollution and improve and protect 

water quality and ecosystems in the 

Columbia River Basin to reduce risks to 

human health and the environment. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, protect, enhance, or restore 

13,000 acres of wetland habitat 

and 3,000 acres of upland habitat in 

the Lower Columbia River watershed. (2005 baseline: 96,770 acres 

of wetland and upland habitat 

available for protection, enhancement, or restoration.) 

• By 2011, clean up 150 acres of 

known highly contaminated 

Photo: Nationa

Atmospheric A

Department of C

sediments. (Baseline: 400 acres of 

known highly contaminated sediments in the main-stem of the 

Columbia River and Lower 

Willamette River as of 2006.) 

•	 By 2011, demonstrate a 10 percent 

reduction in mean concentration 

of contaminants of concern 

found in water and fish tissue. 

(Chemical-specific baselines 

will be available in 2006.)79 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

RESTORING AND PROTECTING ECOSYSTEMS 

EPA protects, sustains, and restores the 

health of natural habitats and ecosystems by 

identifying and evaluating problem areas, 

developing tools, and improving community 

capacity to address problems. Over the next 

5 years, we will target wetlands, estuaries, and 

high-priority areas such as the Great Lakes, 

Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, Long Island 

Sound, South Florida ecosystem, Puget Sound 

Basin, and Columbia River. Our place-based 

ecosystem protection strategies focus on critical watersheds to develop and implement 

water quality control practices and design 

other tools for managing ecosystems that can 

be transferred to other areas nationwide. 
102 

etato, utret overercet, 

pesticides, invasive species, habitat loss, and 

fragmentation are degrading wetlands.81 

And many of the wetlands we have created, 

while beneficial, fail to fully replace the 

diverse plant and animal communities of 

wetlands lost. To help address this issue, EPA 

and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(the Corps) jointly proposed a rule in 2006 

that sets clear criteria for compensatory mitigation of wetland impacts authorized by 

Clean Water Act permits. 

EPA is also cooperating and collaborating 

with federal, state, and tribal governments 

and other stakeholders to achieve the 

President’s goal, 

set in 2004, to 

restore, improve, 

and protect 3 

million acres of 

wetlands by 2009.82 

(Progress under the 

President’s Initiative 

is reported annually 

in a report by the 

Council on 

Environmental 

Quality, “Conserving 

America’s Wetlands: 

Implementing the 

President’s Goal.”)83 

Key EPA programs 

supporting this 

effort include 

the Five Star 

Restoration 

Challenge Grants, 

cable and that unavoidable impac

compensated. EPA will continue c

ing with the Corps to develop a se

science-based standards for all type

gation that compensate for wetlan

other aquatic resource destruction

also work with the Corps to enhan

collection; track Section 404 perm

projects and associated compensat

tion; and provide this information 

state, and tribal agencies and the p

EPA will continue to build sta

tribal capacity to measure wetland 

and condition. Broad-based, integr

toring and assessment programs in

decision makers, target restoration 

and help us address significant stre

Through Wetland Program develo

grants, EPA provides technical and 

support to strengthen state and tri

tion, monitoring, restoration, wate

standards, mitigation compliance, 

partnership-building. Programs suc

Five Star Restoration Challenge G

Program,85 regional geographic init

targeted watershed grants,87 the Na

Estuary Program, and nonpoint so

grants88 provide funding, technica

and information to help communi

ment riparian, coastal, and wetlan

restoration projects. We are also in

wetlands protection into our Clean 

and Brownfields Programs. To learn more go to: www.epa

owow/wetlands. 
sedets, utrets, ad oter poutats 

from adjacent and upstream land-based 

sources, profoundly affecting water quality, 

habitats, living resources, and human health. 

Overuse of natural resources and conflicts 

among recreational and commercial users 

have also resulted in a host of challenges to 

estuarine resources. 

EPA’s National Estuary Program (NEP) 

provides inclusive, community-based 

planning and action in 28 nationally significant estuaries selected by Congress and the 

states’ governors. EPA will support and 

monitor all 28 NEPs in implementing 

approved comprehensive conservation and 

management plans, which identify more than 

2,000 priority actions needed to protect the 

estuaries and restore estuarine resources. In 

addition, we support broad priorities identified by the NEP: developing approaches to 

identify and rank priority habitats; providing 

tools to integrate local and regional plans for 

growth with stormwater management; 

supporting development of TMDLs for coastal 

waters; developing and implementing nutrient 

management strategies, including development of nutrient water quality criteria; 

addressing problems of invasive species; and 

reducing wet weather runoff from urban 

and agricultural areas. 

Healthy estuarine ecosystems also depend 

on high-quality habitat. Through interagency 

partnerships with federal resource agencies, 

such as the Estuary Habitat Restoration 

Council and Coastal America, we will help to 

protect habitat on an ecosystem-wide basis. 

GREAT LAKES 

The Great Lakes are the largest system 

of surface freshwater on earth, containing 

20 percent of the world’s surface freshwater 

and accounting for about 84 percent of the 

surface freshwater in North America. The 

watershed includes 2 nations, 8 American 

states, a Canadian province, more than 

40 tribes, and more than of the 

U.S. population. 

While certain persistent toxic 

substances (PTS) have been reduced significantly in the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem 

over the past 30 years, they continue to be 

present at levels that threaten human and 

wildlife health, warrant fish consumption 

advisories in all 5 lakes, and disrupt a way of 

Casco Bay, ME 

Charlotte Harbor, FL 

Coastal Bend Bays and 

Estuaries,TX 

Lower Columbia River, 

OR/WA 

Delaware Estuary, DE/NJ 

Delaware Inland Bays, DE 

Galveston Bay,TX 

Indian River Lagoon, FL 

Long Island Sound, NY/CT 

Maryland Coastal Bays, MD 

p, 

NH 

New York/New Jersey 

Harbor, NY/NJ 

Peconic Bay, NY 

Puget Sound,WA 

San Francisco Bay, CA 

San Juan Bay, PR 

Santa Monica Bay, CA 

Sarasota Bay, FL 

Tampa Bay, FL 

Tillamook Bay, OR 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries. 
104 

able fisheries, and targeting measurable 

results. In December 2005, the GLRC developed a Great Lakes Regional Collaboration 

Strategy93 that federal agencies are using to 

guide their Great Lakes efforts. For its part, 

EPA is coordinating responses to new aquatic 

invasive species; developing a system for 

tracking progress toward GLRC goals; developing policy on managing peak flows at 

sewage treatment plants; conducting surveillance for emerging chemicals of concern; and 

implementing the Great Lakes Legacy Act. 

The Great Lakes Legacy Act targets 

additional resources to clean up contaminated 

sediments, a significant source of PTS. Work 

conducted under the Legacy Act to reduce 

and eliminate PTS also supports the Great 

Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy. This 

international effort applies voluntary and 

CHESAPEAKE BAY 

EPA’s Chesapeake Bay work is 

unique regional partnership forme

and conduct restoration of the Bay 

tidal tributaries. Partners include M

Virginia; Pennsylvania; Delaware; 

West Virginia; the District of Colu

Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tr

legislative body; EPA, which repre

federal government; and participat

advisory groups. Chesapeake 2000

hensive and far-reaching agreemen

restoration and protection efforts th

2010, and focuses on improving wa

Our challenge is to reduce pollutio

restore aquatic habitat to the exte

Bay’s waters can be removed from 

Water Act “impaired waters” list. We will work with our partner

improve two key measures of Bay w

quality: restoring submerged aquat

vegetation (SAV) and attaining th

dissolved oxygen (DO) standards i

Bay’s tidal waters. The Chesapeak

Program’s long-term goal for SAV 

is 185,000 acres and long-term goa

DO restoration is 100 percent atta

of DO standards in all tidal waters 

Bay. To achieve these long-term go

watershed models estimate that lo

annual nitrogen loadings must be 

162.5 million pounds, phosphorus 

14.36 million pounds, and sedimen

1.69 million tons per year from 198
•

•

•

•

•

•

strategy to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and 

sediment loadings is restoring and protecting 

riparian forests that prevent sediment 

and nutrient pollution from entering 

waterways from the land. Implementing best 

agricultural management practices to 

reduce nutrients and sediment is also key 

to achieving Chesapeake Bay goals, and 

will require close cooperation with U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. We will continue 

to work with other federal agencies and states 

on related initiatives to protect and restore 

critical Bay watershed habitat and improve 

fisheries management. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

region3/chesapeake. 

GULF OF MEXICO 

The Gulf of Mexico’s estuaries and near 

coastal waters support fisheries and wildlife 

habitats that contribute to the national and 

Gulf state economies. However, population 

growth, land development, and coastal and 

commercial activities are threatening the 

sustainability of the Gulf’s marine resources. 

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita also wrought 

widespread environmental harm in 2005. 

EPA’s Gulf of Mexico Program97 helps 

Gulf states and stakeholders work in partnership to develop a regional, ecosystem-based 

framework for restoring and protecting the 

Gulf. The 5 Gulf states have also formed 

a Gulf of Mexico Alliance98 to increase 

collaboration, and 13 federal agencies 

have organized a regional partnership99 

to support the alliance. 

bottom water, causing a corresponding loss of aquatic 

habitat. This “hypoxic zone” is the largest area of 

hypoxia in U.S. waters that is associated with human 

activities. 

EPA is working to reduce the hypoxic zone in the Gulf 

of Mexico through: 

Multi-year funding strategies that will enable states 

to implement measures to reduce nutrients. 

Collaborative monitoring and assessment to measure the performance of nitrogen reduction efforts. 

Updating information, in partnership with USGS and 

sub-basin committees, on flow, nutrient concentrations, and loadings at the mouths of each major 

sub-basin. 

Modeling of the hypoxic zone. 

Cooperatively implementing industry-led nonpoint 

source nutrient reduction strategies. 

Re-assessing nutrient load reductions achieved and 

the response of the hypoxic zone; water quality 

throughout the basin; and economic and social 

effects of Gulf of Mexico hypoxia. 

We are also working with other partners on a 

national hypoxia task force to carry out key actions 

outlined in the Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, 

and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of 

Mexico, with the goal of reducing the size of the 

hypoxic zone from about 14,000 km2 to less than 

5,000 km2 by 2015. 

(Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient 

Task Force. 2001. Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, and 

Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Washington, 

DC. Available on the internet at: www.epa.gov/msbasin/ 

taskforce/pdf/actionplan.pdf. See also Mississippi River Basin 

and Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force internet site: 

www.epa.gov/msbasin/taskforce/index.htm.) 
106 

zation of Gulf habitats for management 

decision making, (4) reductions in nutrient 

loadings, and (5) strategic environmental 

education across the five-state region. To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/gmpo. LONG ISLAND SOUND 

EPA is working with the States of New 

York and Connecticut and other federal, 

state, and local Long Island Sound 

Management Conference partners to implement a comprehensive conservation and 

management plan (CCMP) to restore the 

Long Island Sound.101 Since levels of dissolved 

oxygen are critical to the health of aquatic 

life and viable public use of the Sound, the 

CCMP focuses on controlling nitrogen 

discharges to meet applicable water 

quality standards. 

most economically.

102 

We are also working with Mana

Conference partners to restore degra

habitats; reopen rivers and streams t

anadromous fish passage; improve ri

buffers; restore SAV in key embaym

the impact of toxic substances, path

floatable debris on the ecology; and 

environmental education, managem

stewardship throughout the watersh

To learn more go to: www.epa

region01/eco/lis. SOUTH FLORIDA 

ECOSYSTEM 

The South Florida ecosystem e

es 3 national parks, more than 10 

wildlife refuges, a national preserv

national marine sanctuary. It is ho

Native American nations and it 

supports the largest wilderness area 

the Mississippi River, the only livi

barrier reef adjacent to the United 

and the largest commercial and sp

in Florida. But rapid population gr

threatening the health of this vita

ecosystem. South Florida is home 

8 million people, more than the p

of 39 individual states. Another 2 

people are expected to settle in th

the next 10 to 20 years. Fifty perce

region’s wetlands have been lost to 

and agricultural development, and 

hydrology and water management 

the region have had a major impac

ecosystem. 
related to the Section 404 wetlands protection 

program; the comprehensive Everglades 

Restoration Program; the water quality protection program for the Florida Keys National 

Marine Sanctuary; the Southeast Florida Coral 

Reef Initiative, directed by the U.S. Coral Reef 

Task Force; the Brownfields Program; and a 

number of other waste management programs. 

EPA will continue to implement the 

South Florida Assessment Project, an ecosystem assessment of the Everglades, and to work 

with stakeholders to develop and implement 

community-based approaches to mitigate 

sources of pollution and cumulative risk. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

region4/water/southflorida. 

PUGET SOUND BASIN 

The Puget Sound Basin is the largest 

population and commercial center in the 

Pacific Northwest, supporting a vital system 

of international ports, transportation systems, 

and defense installations. The ecosystem 

encompasses roughly 20 rivers and 2,500 

miles of sheltered inland waters that provide 

habitat to hundreds of species of marine 

mammals, fish, and sea birds. Puget Sound 

salmon landings average more than 19 million pounds per year and support an average 

of 578,000 sport fishing trips each year. 

However, while the Puget Sound currently 

leads U.S. waterways in shellfish production, 

30,000 acres of shellfish beds have been 

closed to harvest since 1980. These closures 

affect local economies and cultural and subsistence needs for these traditional resources. 

Excess nutrients have created hypoxic 

zones that further impair shellfish and finfish 

populations. In addition, recent monitoring 

assessments indicate that marine species in the 

Puget Sound have high levels of toxic contamination. Almost 5,700 acres of submerged 

land (about 9 mi2

) are currently classified as 

contaminated with toxics and another 24,000 

acres as at least partially contaminated. And 

additional pollutants are being released: 

approximately 1 million pounds of toxics are 

released into the water and 5 million pounds 

into the air each year, with many pollutants 

finding their way into Puget Sound. 

To address these issues, EPA is working 

with other federal agencies, states, and tribes 

to protect local watersheds and near-shore 

habitat; to protect shellfish-growing areas; to 

reduce nutrient and toxic discharges; and 

to develop more comprehensive storm water 

management programs. We are taking action 

to reduce short- and long-term discharges 

of toxics through diesel emissions, which are a 

major source of pollutants into the Sound. An 

essential component of our strategy for protecting Puget Sound will be addressing 

contaminated estuary bottom sediments while 

developing more effective source control 

strategies. Working with our state and other 

NEP partners, we are also initiating a comprehensive toxics source control strategy, and we 

expect to have an expanded toxics source control action agenda in place by 2008. 

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ 

pugetsound. 
108

sgcat pats ad aas ad supports 

industries vital to the Pacific Northwest, 

including sport and commercial fisheries, 

agriculture, transportation, recreation, and 

electrical power generation. 

Columbia River salmon and steelhead 

runs—once the largest on earth—are now a 

fraction of their original size. EPA studies and 

state monitoring programs have found significant levels of toxins in fish and the waters 

they inhabit, including dichloro-diphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), PCBs, and 

dieldrin.105 To address this problem, we will 

continue working with Oregon, Washington, 

Idaho, Columbia Basin tribal governments, 

the Lower Columbia River Estuary 

Partnership, local governments, citizen 

groups, industry, and other federal agencies. 

Together we have launched the Columbia 

River toxics strategy to identify and clean up 

contaminated sediments; restore critical wetlands; and reduce toxins in water, land, and 

fish. Within available resources, EPA, states, 

and tribes are systematically expanding such 

key activities as fish, water, and se

monitoring; pesticide stewardship 

ships; targeted pesticide/toxics col

and precision agriculture. We are i

ing TMDLs by reducing sediment 

restoring riparian areas, and we are 

up the Portland Harbor Superfund 

PCB contamination in the Colum

at Bradford Island. 

The NEP also plays a key 

addressing toxics and restoring crit

lands in the Lower Columbia Rive

Through the NEP, we will identify 

nants of concern, identify data bas

provide baseline data and establish 

itoring efforts to fill data gaps, and 

and implement best management 

for reducing contaminants of conc

To learn more go to: www.epa

Region10/columbia. 
MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

ENHANCING SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 

To help us understand environmental 

problems and support innovative approaches 

and solutions, research must be forwardlooking. EPA’s research programs support our 

goals for protecting and restoring communities 

and ecosystems by developing computational 

toxicology, bioinformatics, and related technologies; developing environmental and 

human health monitoring systems and 

indicators, such as the emerging Global Earth 

Observation System of Systems (GEOSS); and 

improving the utility of research results by 

incorporating uncertainty analysis. 

HUMAN HEALTH RESEARCH 

The research that EPA is conducting 

under the Human Health Research Plan 

(HHRP) will enable risk assessors and risk 

managers to reduce their reliance on default 

assumptions in human health risk assessment. 

By addressing uncertainties in risk assessment, HHRP will support a number of 

environmental laws, including FQPA, 

SDWA, and CAA; address a variety of 

national environmental program research 

priorities; and assist risk assessors, such as 

those associated with the Integrated Risk 

Information System (IRIS) and National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 

We are also conducting research to set 

priorities and screen chemicals. Methods, 

models, and data derived from this work will 

help us understand the basis for differential 

response to chemicals at various stages in life. 

EPA will focus a portion of this work on 

assessing differential exposure and response 

in children and another portion on older 

populations. We will also emphasize the 

potential long-term health effects following 

developmental exposure to environmental 

agents. Extramural sources that are jointly 

funded by EPA and the National Institute of 

Environmental Health Sciences will provide 

research in environmental influences on 

neurodevelopment, asthma, and disease. 

Other lines of research will help us develop 

principles for evaluating the effectiveness of 

risk management decisions at the local and 

regional level. We will collaborate with the 

Centers for Disease Control and other federal 

agencies to accomplish this work. 

ECOLOGICAL 

RESEARCH 

Under our 

Ecological Research 

Program, we will 

develop analytical 

tools to help 

evaluate the 

stressors that development and urban 

sprawl place on 

ecosystems and 

determine how we can efficiently control and 

reduce harmful effects. Improving our understanding of indicators of ecological condition 

and of the services ecosystems provide will 
110 

local partnerships. 

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH 

Our Global Change Research Program 

primarily assesses the potential consequences 

of global change on air quality, water quality, 

ecosystems, and human health in the United 

States. It will provide scientific information 

about the impact of global change on specific 

geographic areas, as well as models for evaluating and implementing adaptation policies 

to protect air and water quality. 

This research will support two goals of 

the U.S. Climate Change Science Program 

is emphasizing improved decision 

and adaptive management. Toward 

end, we will develop a dynamic “d

inventory” that identifies different 

climate-sensitive decisions in diffe

regions of the country and evaluat

effectiveness of this scientific infor

informing those decisions. 

ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS RESE

Over the last several years, con

grown about exposure to endocrine

or hormonally active, chemicals. E

suggests that exposure to chemical

mimic hormones (endocrine disrup

cause adverse health effects in wild

may affect human health as well. 

Our endocrine disrupter resear

reduce uncertainty about effects, e

assessment, and management of en

disrupters. It will help us to determ

impact that endocrine disruptors m

on humans, wildlife, and the envir

and will encourage screening and 

assays. Research to understand the 

endocrine disruptors has shifted fro

exposure testing to the relatively n

computational toxicological resear

addition, our increasing ability to 

the human genome has led to a ra

opment of laboratory methods to a

expression on a genome-wide basis

provided additional tools for endo

disruptor research. Continued exp

this field may also facilitate researc

effects of endocrine disruptors. 
and objectivity of health assessments. 

We will continue to use IRIS, the Air 

Quality Criteria Document (AQCD), and 

other assessments to support EPA’s decisions. 

For example, we are revising AQCDs for 

ambient air pollutants (as mandated in the 

Clean Air Act) to reflect the best available 

scientific information on the effects on health 

and the environment from exposure to these 

pollutants, and we will incorporate this information in reviewing and promulgating 

NAAQS. We are working to produce more 

assessment information and to enhance its 

quality by incorporating the latest advances 

in risk assessment science. These activities 

are coordinated across EPA research and 

program offices through the IRIS consensus 

review, the Risk Assessment Forum, and 

other processes. 

COMPUTATIONAL TOXICOLOGY RESEARCH 

Computational toxicology integrates 

modern computing and information technologies with molecular biology and 

chemistry to help set priorities for data 

requirements and chemical risk assessments. 

EPA’s National Center for Computational 

Toxicology will generate methods, models, and 

data needed for better, faster, and cheaper 

approaches to testing chemicals and 

emerging technologies, such as bio- and 

nanotechnology. Associated research will 

help in assessing cumulative effects on 

humans from multiple exposures and in 

identifying and characterizing diseases 

resulting from changing environmental 

factors and factors such as pharmacological 

important research products that enable this 

scanning to be done efficiently and at greatly 

reduced expense. EPA scientists are leading 

this new field of environmental protection, 

and we will apply new capabilities gained 

from this research to future efforts. 

MERCURY RESEARCH 

EPA’s Mercury Research 

Program will provide us a better 

understanding of the transport and 

fate of mercury, from its release to 

its effects. The program is focusing 

on several key questions: 

•	 How much of the methyl


mercury in fish consumed


in the United States is


contributed by emissions,


compared to other sources?


•	 How much of the mercury emissions 

from coal-fired utility boilers and other 

combustion systems can be reduced? 

•	 What is the magnitude of mercury 

released from non-combustion sources? 

•	 What risks do exposure to methyl 

mercury pose to wildlife species and 

other significant ecological receptors? 

•	 How does exposure to environmental 

sources of mercury affect the health 

of the most susceptible human 

sub-populations? 

•	 How can we most effectively inform 

susceptible populations about these 

risks? 
112 

Another high priority for the Mercury 

Program will be providing information to 

states and utilities on alternative control 

technologies. Researchers are also working 

to identify mercury deposition “hot spots” 

that already exist or may occur as a result of 

market trading of mercury emissions. HOMELAND SECURITY RESEARCH 

Threat and consequence assessment 

research focuses on 

rapid evaluation of 

chemical, biological, 

and radiological 

risks associated with 

a terrorist threat or 

attack. This research 

will enable better 

emergency and follow-up responses by developing products for 

locating, collecting, and analyzing samples; 

protecting emergency responders, the public, 

and the environment; decontaminating buildings; and disposing of contaminated materials. 

EPA researchers will be developing and refining advisory levels for various contaminants 

of concern, improving risk assessment meth­ ods and communication tools, and supporting 

emergency and follow-up responders. 

Our water infrastructure protection 

research will continue to focus on treatment 

operations; drinking water distribution 

systems; and, to a lesser degree, wastewater 

collection, treatment operations, and treated 

research involves laboratory and fi

and evaluation of technologies to 

nate and dispose of materials and a

affected by intentional attacks. We will provide the results of o

homeland security research to the e

and remedial response community, 

appointed officials, and the general 

SAFE PESTICIDES AND PRODUCTS 

By developing and applying th

molecular and computational appr

EPA’s Safe Pesticides/Safe Product

Research Program will provide new 

interpreting exposure, hazard iden

and dose-response information, str

our ability to develop risk assessme

ods to protect birds, fish, and othe

This research has become increasi

to advances in computational toxi

Scientific progress in sequencing t

genome has rapidly led to laborato

methods for assessing gene express

genome-wide basis, which will con

the tools available for SP2 research

EPA researchers will be de

methods for extrapolation among 

species and exposure scenarios of c

(e.g., exposure of endangered spec

advance the scientific foundation 

ducting probabilistic risk assessmen

wildlife populations. SP2 research 

contribute to evaluating potential 

effects of biotechnology products, 

risk management approaches, and 

methods for assessing the potentia

allergenicity of genetically enginee
gists to evaluate the exposure impact of 

chemical releases on wetlands; specialized 

needed to fill missioncritical scientist/ 

researcher positions. 

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 

Many of our strategic targets for protecting, sustaining, or restoring the health of 

people, communities, and ecosystems rely on 

measures or indicators of changes in the environment or human health, such as habitat and 

water quality conditions or blood lead levels. 

Collecting and analyzing these data are often 

expensive and time-consuming. Moreover, 

because changes in environmental and 

health conditions that result from EPA 

programs may not be evident for several 

years, it is not always practicable or useful to 

collect these data annually. Consequently, 

while these environmental and health 

outcome measures and data are excellent 

indicators of EPA’s long-term performance, 

the Agency also uses other shorter-term 

measures and data to manage programs. 

The Brownfields Program has developed 

a new strategic target for the acres of brownfields made ready for reuse. This new 

strategic target better represents the outcome 

of the Brownfields Program than the program’s 

long-standing strategic target of brownfield 

properties assessed. The number of brownfield 

properties assessed will eventually be tracked 

only as an annual performance measure 

rather than as a strategic target. 

Another new strategic target set under 

this goal involves human body-burden of 

pesticides. It embodies metrics presented as 

environmental indicators in EPA’s forthcoming 

Report on the Environment. We have also 

incorporated in this Strategic Plan most of the 

long-term, outcome-oriented measures currently used in the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) Program Assessment Rating 

Tool (PART) assessments of various pesticide, toxics, brownfields, and geographic 

programs. 

Measuring progress toward research goals 

can be challenging, not only for EPA but for 

science and research programs across the 

government. We use a number of objective 

measures of customer satisfaction, product 

impact and quality, and efficiency to assess 

our results. For example, we rely on expert 

review panel ratings on the extent to which 
114 

we also assessed longer-term opportunities 

for developing more results-based, outcomeoriented commitments. Under our communities and ecosystems goal, for example, we 

will focus collaborative research plans to better represent risks to human health and 

ecosystems from toxic substances and pesticides. We are working with the Board of 

Scientific Counselors and others to develop 

a means for using independent expert review 

to assess the success of all of our research 

programs. We also have identified as a priority 

developing a Chesapeake Bay Water Quality 

Index to represent the Bay’s aquatic health 

more comprehensively. We are also integrating environmental 

justice considerations under each of our 

Strategic Plan goals for the first time. In 

particular, we have identified eight national 

environmental justice priorities as deserving 

of special attention.107 While this 

Plan identifies actions and/or strat

address these priorities, we can ma

progress in developing tailored tar

measures to evaluate changes in ar

potential environmental justice co

Our ability to target resources and 

progress will improve as we gain ex

develop new tools, and further int

environmental justice consideratio

EPA’s work. In addition to the perfo

measures already established, we wi

progress with respect to the followin

environmental justice priorities: as

attacks, exposure to air toxics, blo

levels, fish and shellfish safe to eat

to drink, and revitalization of brow

and contaminated sites. 

USING FEEDBACK FROM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMEN

AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS 

Programs supporting our goal of healthy 

communities and ecosystems are assessed in 

three ways: internal EPA program evaluations, including those conducted by EPA’s 

Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and 

Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC); OMB PART reviews; and external assessments by 

organizations such as the Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) and the 

National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 

INTERNAL 

PROGRAM EVALUAT

The BOSC Human Health 

Subcommittee evaluated the Agen

Human Health Research Program

term goals, which are related to th

information in risk assessment, agg

cumulative risk, susceptible sub-po

and public health outcomes. In res

to BOSC recommendations, we in
accountability, evaluate decision-making 

processes, and identify best practices. The 

review, to be completed in FY 2008, is 

intended to enhance program quality overall. 

OIG has conducted extensive reviews of 

programs supporting the healthy communities and ecosystems goal. Over the past 

several years, OIG has: 

•	 Assessed how well EPA has integrated 

environmental justice in our operations and provided recommendations 

for reaffirming our commitment 

to environmental justice and 

strengthening planning efforts. 

•	 Reviewed our implementation of 

the Food Safety Act and provided 

recommendations for considering 

sub-populations, responding to 

petitions, and increasing public 

participation. 

•	 Assessed implementation of the 

Brownfields Program and provided 

recommendations for managing 

resources and improving the grant 

application and selection process. 

PROGRAM ASSESSMENT 

RATING TOOL (PART) 

Many of the programs supporting Goal 4 

have been assessed under OMB’s PART 

process. Summaries of all completed PART 

studies are available at www.whitehouse.gov/ 

omb/expectmore/. Among the programs 

evaluated were: 

•	 U.S.-Mexico Border Water 

Infrastructure—rated adequate. 

•	 The Ecological Research 

Program—rated ineffective. 

(The program is conducting follow-up 

actions to address this issue.) 

•	 Human Health Research—rated 

adequate. 

•	 Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals 

Research—rated adequate. 

EXTERNAL EVALUATIONS 

EPA participates with outside organizations, such as GAO and NAS, in evaluating 

program effectiveness and recommending 

improvements in program management and 

policies. GAO has conducted numerous evaluations of programs supporting the healthy 
116 

Stakeholders Cite Additional 

Measures that Could Complement 

EPA’s Efforts to Clean Up and 

Redevelop Properties (April 2005). 

•	Wetlands: Corps of Engineers Needs 

to Better Support its Decisions for 

Not Asserting Jurisdiction 

(September 2005). 

•	 Great Lakes: Organizational 

Leadership and Restoration Goals 

Need to be Better Defined for 

Monitoring Restoration Progress 

(September 2004). 

•	 Chesapeake Bay: Improved Strategies 

Are Needed to Better Assess, Report, 

and Manage Restoration Progress 

(October 2005). 

Rapidly changing technologies will have significant 

implications for EPA’s work to 

protect and restore communities 

and ecosystems. In the area of 

nanotechnology, for example, 

nanoscale materials—chemical 

substances containing structures 

on the scale of approximately 1 

to 100 nanometers, or 1 to 100 

billionths of a meter—will present an emerging challenge for 

our chemicals program. Due to 

their small size, nanomaterials 

may have different molecular 

properties than do other 

2004, Valuing Ecosystem Service

Better Environmental Decision M

EPA’s risk assessment forum has al

vened external reviews to evaluate 

when appropriate. The Endocrine 

Chemical Research Program was e

this manner. 

BOSC has initiated a cycle of 

for EPA’s research programs and is 

an average of three programs each 

relevance, quality, and performanc

Between 2005 and 2006, BOSC re

and made recommendations for im

four research plans supporting hea

munity and ecosystem goals: huma

ecosystems, global climate change

endocrine disrupting chemicals. 

chemical substances and may prese

unique risks. EPA is currently revie

pre-manufacture notices for severa

nanoscale chemical substances, an

anticipate that we will soon be rec

applications to register pesticides c

nanoscale materials. (The first pub

tory of nanotechnology products t

entered commercial use is availabl

www.nanotechproject.org/invento

EPA’s nascent nanotechnology 

program is focusing on decision su

guiding safe commercial and envir

applications. Between 2007 and 20

nanotechnology research will addr

broad areas: 

EMERGING ISSUES AND EXTERNAL FACTORS 
durability and longer shelf life, they 

might conserve energy and other 

resources, prevent pollution, and 

advance sustainability. 

•	 Identifying and developing research 

technologies that use nanomaterials 

to detect, monitor, and remediate 

environmental releases of conventional pollutants and nanoparticles. 

We are also responding to nanotechnology 

with a new environmental stewardship 

program that will complement TSCA regulatory tools. In partnership with chemical 

manufacturers, processors of nanoscale materials, and other stakeholders, we will gather 

data to inform our risk assessment and risk 

reduction activities. We will use this data and 

information gained from strategic testing to 

determine whether commercial activities 

involving nanoscale materials present potential risks, and we will respond appropriately. 

EPA may also be able to provide companies 

with tools that will help them anticipate 

environmental risks and invest in safer 

products and production procedures. 

EPA is also anticipating the use of DNA 

micro-arrays in environmental chemical 

testing. DNA micro-arrays are a type of technology that profiles the genomes of plant and 

animal species and uses sequences like probes 

to recognize substances. These technologies 

have the potential to change and enhance 

chemical testing in multiple environmental 

areas. EPA researchers are making significant 

progress in using DNA micro-arrays (gene 

chips) and related developments, particularly 

in computational toxicology. 

feed into a central environmental data management and analysis system, such as EPA’s 

GEOSS. Through distributed sensor networks, we could collect and transmit data 

faster and more frequently, improve data 

quality, enhance data integration, and 

improve data sharing. Distributed sensor 

networks could also provide better environmental health information that allows us to 

measure progress at multiple temporal and 

spatial scales. This technology could support 

our Report on the Environment, advance our 

foresight capabilities, and provide data that 

accurately portrays environmental conditions 

on a real-time basis. 

Renewable energy and fuel sources such 

as biofuels could have many implications for 

EPA. We will need to examine how producing new renewable and non-renewable forms 

of energy and the infrastructure for distributing and storing them might affect the 

environment. For example, the use of pesticides and loss of habitat that attend 

production of biofuels can potentially affect 

human health and the environment. We will 

also need to characterize the potential for 

emissions generated from producing and 

using biofuels. 
118

To learn more go to: www.epa.gov/ocfo/futures/perspectives.ht

NOTES: 

1.	 For information on EPA’s National Land Cover Database, see U.S. EPA, Landscape Ecology Study 

net site: www.epa.gov/nerlesd1/land-sci/. Las Vegas, NV: Office of Research and Development. Se

Department of the Interior, Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium internet site: www

Sioux Falls, SD: U.S. Geological Survey. Also see U.S. Department of the Interior, Earth Resourc

Observation and Science (EROS), Global Land Cover Characterization internet site: 

edcsns17.cr.usgs.gov/glcc/. U.S. Geological Survey (updated June 27, 2005). For information on E

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program, see U.S. EPA, Environmental Monitoring and 

Program (EMAP) internet site: www.epa.gov/emap/. For information on EPA’s Report on the Enviro

U.S. EPA Report on the Environment internet site: www.epa.gov/indicators/index.htm. Washington

2.	 Measurement Mechanism: EPA risk management action tracking tools, including RAPIDS (not p

available) and HPVIS. See U.S. EPA, High Production Volume Information System (HPVIS) int

http://epa.gov/hpvis/. Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. On

challenge chemicals have been through the EPA multi-tier risk assessment process, any found to p

sonable risks under the Toxics Substance Control Act is tracked for action, such as Significant Ne

(SNURs) that bind all manufacturers and processors to terms and conditions that prevent unreaso

other regulatory action, guidance, referral to other Agency statutes, etc. 

3.	 Measurement Mechanism: Number of TSCA 8(e) Chemical Hazard Notifications associated with 

Pre-manufacture notice (PMN)-reviewed chemicals verified to identify the occurrence of unreaso

Starting in FY 2005, EPA expanded its assessment of incoming TSCA 8(e) reports, required to be 

whenever companies learn of “substantial risks” to determine whether EPA properly identified tho

hazards/risks in previously reviewed PMNs. The results of this new assessment process enables the 

identify potential flaws in its PMN review protocols and act quickly to make associated improvem

4.	 Target assumes annual 3.0% reductions for remaining years through 2011. Measurement Mechani

EPA’s Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model. See U.S. EPA Risk Screening Env

Indicators (RSEI) internet site: www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/. Washington, DC: Office of Prevention

and Toxic Substances. 

5.	 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2005. Blood Lead Levels-United States, 1999-2002, 

54(2): 513-516. Available online at: www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/wk/mm5420.pdf. 

6.	 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1994. Update: Blood Lead Levels--United States, 19

MMWR: 43(30): 545-548. Available online at: www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00032080

7.	 United Nations Environment Program and the Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles maintain 

database on fuel quality, which is updated periodically. See United Nations, Partnership for Clean 

Vehicles internet site: http://webapps01.un.org/dsd/partnerships/public/partnerships/178.html#top. 

NY: Division for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 
11.	 The term “risk events” is based on the assumption that every pesticide application has the potential to create 

a pesticide incident with adverse health effects. The number of pesticide applications was derived by taking 

the universe of occupationally exposed individuals and estimating the number of pesticide applications per 

individual per year. Data sources: EPA’s annual count of certified applicators; U.S. Department of Labor. March 

2005. Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2001 - 2002. A Demographic and 

Employment Profile of United States Farm Workers, Research Report No. 9., Washington, DC: Office of the 

Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office of Programmatic Policy (available online at: www.doleta.gov/agworker/ 

naws.cfm) and; American Association of Poison Control Centers’ Toxic Exposure Surveillance System: 

www.aapcc.org/poison1.htm. 

12.	 American Association of Poison Control Centers’ Toxic Exposure Surveillance System: www.aapcc.org/ 

poison1.htm. 

13.	 USGS National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program, as reported in Gilliom, R. J., J. E. Barbash, et 

al. 2006. The Quality of Our Nation’s Waters: Pesticides in the Nation’s Streams and Ground Water, 1992–2001. 

Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 1291: 172 p. Available online at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/ 

2005/1291/. 

14.	 Annual Report of the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4Project) (NRSP-4/IR-4): 

January 1, 2005-December 31, 2005: http://ir4.rutgers.edu/Other/annreports.html. 

15.	 EPA’s estimate of annual termite structural damage avoided is derived from an estimated $2,500 average termite 

damage per house, 3,620,000 units receiving termite treatment, and an estimate that 10 percent of housing 

units would have received termite damage absent the treatment ($2,500 x 3,620,000 units = $9.05 billion 

x 0.1 = $9.05 million/year termite structural damage avoided.) 

16.	 Toxic Substances Control Act Section 5: Manufacturing and Processing Notices, Public Law 94-469, 

October 11, 1976. 

17.	 U.S. EPA, High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program internet site: www.epa.gov/chemrtk/. 

Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances (updated April 20, 2006). 

18.	 U.S. EPA, High Production Volume Information System (HPVIS) internet site: www.epa.gov/hpvis/index.html. 

Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 

19.	 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Co-operation on the Investigation of Existing 

Chemicals, Description of OECD Work on Investigation of High Production Volume Chemicals internet site: 

www.oecd.org/document/21/0,2340,en_2649_34379_1939669_1_1_1_1,00.html. See also Global HPV Portal 

and existing databases internet site: www.oecd.org/document/9/ 

0,2340,en_2649_34379_35211849_1_1_1_1,00.html. Also see United Nations Environmental Program, 

Chemical Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) for High Volume Chemicals internet site: 

www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/sidspub.html. 

20.	 Advanced tools developed under the NCP include QSAR - Quantitative Structure Activity Relationships. 

There is no defined base data set required before PMN, and the TSCA does not require prior testing of new 

chemicals. Consequently, less than half of the PMNs submitted include toxicological data. In these cases, EPA 

scientists assess the chemical’s structural similarity to chemicals for which data are available—called structureactivity relationship (SAR)–to help predict toxicity. A useful discussion of SAR is found in an OECD monograph, US EPA/EC Joint Project on the Evaluation of (Quantitative) Structure Activity Relationships, Environment 

Monograph No. 88, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Paris, 1994. Available online 

at: www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/ene4147.pdf. 
120 

, ff 

Associated with Exposure to Perfluorooctanoic Acid and its Salts. Washington, DC, Office of Pollution 

and Toxics, Risk Assessment Division. Available online at: www.epa.gov/opptintr/pfoa/pubs/pfoari

23.	 U.S. EPA, RMP Program Overview internet site: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/ceppoweb.nsf/con

RMPoverview.htm. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency Management. 

24.	 U.S. EPA, EPCRA Overview internet site: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/ceppoweb.nsf/content/ 

epcraOverview.htm. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency Management. 

25.	 U.S. EPA, Acute Exposure Guideline Levels Program internet site: www.epa.gov/opptintr/aegl/. 

Washington, DC: Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 

26.	 U.S. EPA, Pesticides internet site: www.epa.gov/pesticides/. Washington, DC: Office of Pesticide P

(updated June 1, 2006). 

27.	 U.S. EPA, Pesticides: Topical & Chemical Fact Sheets, Pesticide Registration Program internet si

www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/registration.htm (updated May 2, 2006). 

28.	 U.S. EPA, Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration internet site: www.epa.gov/pestici

reregistration. 

29.	 See U.S. EPA, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Reducing Pesticide Risk internet site: 

www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/reducing.htm. 

30.	 U.S. Department of Labor. March 2005. Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (N

2001 - 2002. A Demographic and Employment Profile of United States Farm Workers, Research Repo

Washington, DC: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office of Programmatic Policy. Ava

at: www.doleta.gov/agworker/naws.cfm. 

31.	 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 sections 7(a)1 and 7(a)2; Federal Agency Actions and Cons

amended (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)). Available at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species A

internet site: www.fws.gov/endangered/esa.html#Lnk07. 

32.	 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended. January 23, 2004. Section 3(a), 

of Registration (7 U.S.C. 136a). Available online at: www.epa.gov/opp00001/regulating/fifra.pdf. 

33.	 Gilliom, R.J., et al. 2006. The Quality of Our Nation’s Waters: Pesticides in the Nation’s Streams and 

Water, 1992–2001. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1291. 171p. Available onlin

http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/1291/. 

34.	 Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)). Ava

Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act of 1973 internet site: www.fws.gov/endangered

esa.html#Lnk07. 

35.	 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2004. 

Joint Counterpart Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Regulations, 50 CFR Part 402

online at: http://endangered.fws.gov/consultations/pesticides/Final_Rule.pdf. 

36.	 Community-specific baselines for criteria air pollutants, land consumption, and storm water run-o

assistance prior will be compared to environmental impacts from community actions affecting gro

development, as predicted in computer-modeled alternative future development scenarios within 
p//ppg//_p_qyg______ 

IDENTIFIED=1&P _DATA_IDENTIFIED=97509&P_VERSION=1. 

39.	 Census estimate of homes lacking access minus homes provided with access between 2000 and 2003. 

40.	 2000 Census estimate of homes lacking access to adequate wastewater sanitation minus homes provided with 

access between 2000 and 2003. 

41.	 These initial baselines were calculated from Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme data that includes 

human health data points from indigenous maternal populations across the Arctic, including Alaska, Canada, 

Norway, and the Russian Federation. Measurement Mechanism: Assessment of data from AMAP, an existing 

international scientific working group, which advises governments of the eight Arctic countries on issues 

related to pollution in the Arctic. AMAP data is presented in periodic scientifically-based assessments, which 

are a result of cooperative efforts involving a large number of scientists and other stakeholders, who follow 

agreed quality assurance and control protocols consistent with such practices common in the United States. For 

summary of source data, see AMAP, 2002. Arctic Pollution 2002 (Persistent Organic Pollutants, Heavy Metals, 

Radioactivity, Human Health, Changing Pathways). Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), 

Oslo, Norway. xii+112 pp. See also Persistent Toxic Substances, Food Security and Indigenous Peoples of the 

Russian North. Final Report. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, 2004. 192 p. 

AMAP Report 2004:2. Documents are available on the AMAP internet site: www.amap.no/. 

42.	 U.S. EPA, Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) program internet site: 

http://cfpub.epa.gov/care/. 

43.	 Clinton, William J. February 16, 1994. Federal actions to address environmental justice in minority populations 

and low-income populations. Executive Order 12898, 59 FR 7629. Available online at: www.archives.gov/ 

federal-register/executive-orders/1994.html#12898. 

44.	 Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Public Law 107-118 (H.R. 2869), 115 stat. 

2356). Available online at: www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/sblrbra.htm#status. 

45.	 Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology Support Center internet site: www.brownfieldstsc.org/. 

U.S. EPA’s Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and 

Argonne National Laboratory. 

46.	 Triad Resource Center internet site: www.triadcentral.org/. Triad is an innovative approach to decision making 

for hazardous waste site characterization and remediation. The Triad approach proactively exploits new characterization and treatment tools. The Triad Resource Center provides the information hazardous waste site 

managers and cleanup practitioners need to implement the Triad effectively. The U.S. EPA, U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, Argonne National Laboratory, State of New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection, and the Interstate Technology Regulatory Council support Triad. 

47.	 SMARTe (Sustainable Management Approaches and Revitalization Tools) internet site: 

www.smarte.org/smarte/home/index.xml. SMARTe is an open-source, web-based, decision support system for 

developing and evaluating future reuse scenarios for potentially contaminated land. SMARTe contains 

guidance and analysis tools for all aspects of the revitalization process including planning, environmental, 

economic, and social concerns. The U.S. EPA’s Office of Research and Development and Office of Brownfields 

Cleanup and Redevelopment, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, and the Interstate 

Technology Regulatory Council support its development. 
122 

py y g

reported through the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference (SOLEC) process. The document, 

Great Lakes 2005—A Technical Report, presents detailed indicator reports prepared by primary auth

including listings of data sources. 

55.	 U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Monitoring, Contaminants in Top Predator Fish internet site: www.epa.go

glindicators/fishtoxics/topfishb.html. 

56.	 Data are collected through the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN). See U.S. E

Great Lakes Monitoring, Atmospheric Deposition of Toxic Pollutants internet site: www.epa.gov/

glindicators/air/airb.html. 

57.	 U.S. EPA, Areas of Concern (AoCs) On-line, Great Lakes internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/i

Chicago, Illinois: Great Lakes National Program Office. 

58.	 U.S. EPA, Sediment Remediation, Great Lakes internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/glindicators/sedi

remediateb.html. Chicago, Illinois: Great Lakes National Program Office. 

59.	 Batiuk, R., et al. April 2003. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen, Water Clarit

Chlorophyll a for Chesapeake Bay and Its Tidal Tributaries, Annapolis, Maryland: U.S. EPA, Reg

Chesapeake Bay Program Office: www.chesapeakebay.net/maycriteria.htm. 

60.	 Ibid. 

61.	 Koroncai, R., et al. December 2003, Setting and Allocating the Chesapeake Bay Basin Nutrient a

Loads: The Collaborative Process, Technical Tools, and Innovative Approaches. Annapolis, Mary

EPA, Region 3, Chesapeake Bay Program Office: www.chesapeake bay.net/caploads.htm. 

62.	 Ibid. 

63.	 Ibid. 

64.	 U.S. EPA, Surf Your Watershed, 2002 Section 303(d) List Fact Sheets for 

Florida (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=FL), 

Alabama (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=AL), 

Mississippi (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=MS, 

Louisiana (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=LA), and 

Texas (http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/state_rept.control?p_state=TX). 

Also see U.S. EPA, Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results (WATERS), WA

Query Tool: http://iaspub.epa.gov/waters/ez_column.list?table_name=V_WO_IMPAIRMENTS_L

U.S. EPA, Region 4 Alabama’s and Mississippi’s 2002 303(d) List Review Decision Document and 

2003 303(d) List Decision; U.S. EPA, Region 6. Louisiana’s 2002 Section 303(d) List of Water Qu

Water Bodies and Review of Texas’ 2002 Section 303(d) Water Body List. Sources for geospatial d

303(d) mapping by Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Alabama Department of En

Management, Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Louisiana Department of Enviro

Quality, and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 

65.	 LaRoe, E.T., G.S. Farris, C.E. Puckett, P.D. Doran, and M.J. Mac, eds. 1995. Our Living Resource

the Nation on the Distribution, Abundance, and Health of U.S. Plants, Animals, and Ecosystems

National Biological Service, Washington, DC; 530 pp. Available online at: 

http://biology.usgs.gov/s+t/index.htm. 
p//p///g/_pg

69.	 Long Island Sound Study, Sound Health 2006 Environmental Indicators: www.longislandsoundstudy.net/ 

indicators/index.htm on Water Quality/Water Quality Measures. Stamford, CT: EPA Long Island Sound Office. 

70.	 Long Island Sound Study, Sound Health 2006 Environmental Indicators: www.longislandsoundstudy.net/ 

indicators/index.htm on Habitat Protection/River Miles Restored and Coastal Habitat Restored. Stamford, CT: 

EPA Long Island Sound Office. 

71.	 U. S. EPA, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, NOAA, Coral Reef Evaluation and 

Monitoring Project (CREMP), Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program: 

http://ocean.floridamarine.org/fknms_wqpp/pages/cremp.html. 

72.	 Florida International University, Southeast Environmental Research Center, Seagrass Ecosystems Research 

Laboratory: www.fiu.edu/~seagrass. 

73.	 Florida International University, Southeast Environmental Research Center, Water Quality Monitoring 

Network: www.serc.fiu.edu/wqmnetwork. 

74.	 U.S. EPA, Ecoregional Criteria, Nutrient Water Quality Criteria: www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/ 

ecoregions/. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. July 2, 2006. Calculation of Annual and 5-Year 

Geometric Mean Total Phosphorus Concentrations to Assess Achievement of the Phosphorus Criteria for the 

Everglades Protection Area. 

75.	 Puget Sound Assessment and Monitoring Program Update. Puget Sound Action Team and Washington 

Department of Health, 2006: www.doh.wa/gov/ehp/sf/sfpubs.htm#GrowingAreasPubs. 

76.	 U.S. EPA, Region 10, Superfund Site Inventory for Puget Sound, internal database. 

77.	 Puget Sound Nearshore Restoration Site Inventory, Washington Interagency Committee for Outdoor 

Recreation, project-tracking database, August 2006. 

78.	 Baseline data will be based on Washington State input to the National Emissions Inventory Database. 

79.	 The development of baselines for contaminants of concern found in water and fish tissue will include the 

following sources: (1) Hood River Watershed, DEQ 2006, Mill Creek Watershed, DEQ 2006, Walla Walla 

Watershed, DEQ 2006 (pending), Pudding River Watershed, DEQ 2006 (pending), and Clackamas River, 

Watershed DEQ 2006 (pending). These reports which are found in hard copy will be put on the EPA Columbia 

River website (as a part of the baseline information), which is currently under development. (2) Water 

Cleanup Plans (TMDLs) by Watershed/Ecology Region, www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/tmdl/watershed/ 

index.html (updated April 2005); Yakima River Pesticide TMDL, Okanogan River DDT and PCB TMDL, 

Wenatchee River, Mission Creek, and Lake Chelan PCB and Pesticide TMDL, Walla Walla Pesticide and PCB 

TMDL, and Palouse River Pesticide and PCB TMDL. (3) U.S. EPA. 2002. Columbia River Basin Fish 

Contaminant Survey: 1996-1998 (EPA, 910-R-02-006). Seattle, Washington: Region 10, Risk Evaluation Unit: 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/OEA.NSF/af6d4571f3e2b1698825650f0071180a/ 

c3a9164ed269353788256c09005d36b7?OpenDocument. (4) Fixed Station and Seasonal Monitoring of 

Conventional and Toxic Contaminants on the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership (LCREP) Internet 

site: www.lcrep.org/eco_water_qual.htm#fixed. (5) Johnson, A. and D. Norton. March 2005. Concentrations of 

303(d) Listed Pesticides, PCBs, and PAHs Measured with Passive Samplers Deployed in the Lower Columbia River, 

Ecology Publication No. 05-03-006. Olympia WA., Washington State Department of Ecology: 

www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0503006.pdf. 
124 

Implementing the President’s Goal. Available online at: www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/wetlands_200604.p

84.	 Compensatory Mitigation Rulemaking web page: www.epa.gov/wetlandsmitigation. 

85.	 U.S. EPA, Five Star Restoration Program internet site: www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/5star/

Washington, DC: Office Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. 

86.	 U.S. EPA, Regional Geographic Initiatives internet site: www.epa.gov/regional/rgi.htm. Washingt

Office of Regional Operations. 

87.	 U.S. EPA, Targeted Watershed Grants Program internet site: www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/initia

Washington, DC: Office Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. 

88.	 U.S. EPA, Polluted Runoff (Nonpoint Source Pollution), Clean Water Act Section 319 internet 

www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/cwact.html. Washington, DC: Office Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersh

89.	 Beach, Dana. 2002. Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban Design on Aquatic Ecosystems in the United 

Arlington, VA: Pew Oceans Commission. Available online at: www.pewtrusts.org/ideas/ 

ideas_item.cfm?content_item_id=1023&content_type_id=8. 

90.	 Bush, George W. May 18, 2004: Executive Order: Establishment of Great Lakes Interagency Task 

Promotion of a Regional Collaboration of National Significance for the Great Lakes. Executive O

Available at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040518-3.html 

91.	 U.S. EPA, Great Lakes, Regional Collaboration: Interagency Task Force internet sites: 

www.epa.gov/grtlakes/collaboration/taskforce/index.html. 

92.	 U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Regional Collaboration: Making the Great Lakes Greater internet site: 

www.epa.gov/grtlakes/collaboration/index.html. See also: Bush, George W. May 18, 2004. Executi

Establishment of Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and promotion of a regional collaboration o

significance for the Great Lakes. Washington, DC. Available online at: www.epa.gov/grtlakes/coll

taskforce/eo.html. 

93.	 Great Lakes Regional Collaboration internet site: www.glrc.us/. See also Great Lakes Regional Colla

Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes. December 2005. Chicago, IL: Great Lakes Regional 

Collaboration. Available online at: www.glrc.us/strategy.html. 

94.	 U.S. EPA, Great Lakes Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction, Great Lakes Binational Toxic

internet site: www.epa.gov/glnpo/bns/index.html. 

95.	 U.S. EPA, Chesapeake Bay Program. June 2000. Chesapeake 2000 Agreement. Annapolis, Marylan

online at: http://chesapeakebay.net/pubs/chesapeake2000agreement.pdf. 

96.	 Koroncai, R., et al. December 2003. Setting and Allocating the Chesapeake Bay Basin Nutrient and Se

The Collaborative Process, Technical Tools, and Innovative Approaches. Annapolis, Maryland: U.S. E

Chesapeake Bay Program Office: www.chesapeakebay.net/caploads.htm. 

97.	 U.S. EPA, Gulf of Mexico Program internet site: www.epa.gov/gmpo. 

98.	 The Gulf of Mexico Alliance internet site: www.dep.state.fl.us/gulf/. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida D

Environmental Protection. 
103. Long Island Sound Study, Long Island Sound 2003 Agreement internet site: 

www.longislandsoundstudy.net/ccmp/liss_agreement_03.htm. Stamford, CT: EPA Long Island Sound Office. 

104. U.S. EPA, Region 4: South Florida Geographic Initiative internet site: www.epa.gov/region4/ 

water/southflorida/. 

105. U.S. EPA. 2002. Columbia River Basin Fish Contaminant Survey:1996-1998 (EPA, 910-R-02-006). Seattle, 

Washington, U.S. EPA Region 10, Risk Evaluation Unit: http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/OEA.NSF/ 

af6d4571f3e2b1698825650f0071180a/c3a9164ed269353788256c09005d36b7?OpenDocument. Also see Fixed 

Station and Seasonal Monitoring of Conventional and Toxic Contaminants on the Lower Columbia River 

Estuary Partnership (LCREP) internet site: www.lcrep.org/eco_water_qual.htm#fixed. Also see Johnson, A. and 

D. Norton. March 2005. Concentrations of 303(d) Listed Pesticides, PCBs, and PAHs Measured with Passive 

Samplers Deployed in the Lower Columbia River, Ecology Publication No. 05-03-006. Olympia WA: Washington 

State Department of Ecology. www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0503006.pdf. 

106. U.S. EPA Report on the Environment internet site: www.epa.gov/indicators/index.htm. 

107. On November 5, 2005, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson established eight national environmental justice priorities in a memorandum, “Reaffirming the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Commitment to 

Environmental Justice.” The memorandum is available online at www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/ 

policies/ej/admin-ej-commit-letter-110305.pdf . The national environmental justice priorities include: (1) 

Reduce asthma attacks; (2) Fish and shellfish safe to eat; (3) Reduce exposure to air toxics; (4) Water safe to 

drink; (5) Reduced incidence of elevated blood lead levels; (6) Collaborative problem-solving; (7) Ensure compliance; and (8) Revitalization of brownfields and contaminated sites. 
GOAL 5
Compliance and 

Environmental 

Stewardship


Protect human health and the environment through ensuring 

compliance with environmental requirements by enforcing 

environmental statutes, preventing pollution, and promoting 

environmental stewardship. Encourage innovation and provide 

incentives for governments, businesses, and the public that promo

environmental stewardship and long-term sustainable outcomes. 
Effective compliance assistance and strong, consistent enforcement 

critical to achieving the human health and environmental benefits exp

from our environmental laws. By offering compliance assistance to tho

want to comply with environmental regulations and standing ready wit

strong enforcement program, we will ensure that the public receives th

benefits promised by our environmental laws. We will achieve significa

environmental results by focusing our efforts on priority problem areas 

identified through consultation with states and tribes. We will protect 

public by criminally prosecuting willful, intentional, and serious violati

the federal environmental laws. 

At the same time, EPA will promote the principles of responsible 

stewardship, sustainability, and accountability to achieve all of its stra

goals. Collaborating closely with our federal, state, and tribal partners, 

the Agency will focus efforts on innovations that assist businesses and 

communities in improving their environmental performance. To achie

pollution prevention goals, we will work with industrial, governmenta

non-governmental partners to increase the effectiveness of voluntary a

self-directed approaches that minimize or eliminate the generation of pollution. In addition, EPA 

continue to conduct research on pollution prevention, new and developing technologies, social 

economic issues, and decision-making. 

Granta Nakayama 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance A

Jim Gulliford 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic 

128
Compliance and 

Environmental Stewardsh

EPA is working to ensure that government, business, requirements. Stewards of the environment rec

and the public comply with federal laws and regulations wastes to the greatest extent possible, minimize 

designed to protect the environment eliminate pollution at its so

and human health. We employ 

OBJECTIVES

Objective 5.1: Achieve 

Environmental Protection 

Through Improved 

Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . .130 

Objective 5.2: Improve 

Environmental Performance 

Through Pollution Prevention 

and Other Stewardship 

Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133 

Objective 5.3: Improve 

Human Health and the 

Environment in Indian 

Country1

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138

Objective 5.4: Enhance 

Society’s Capacity for 

Sustainability Through Science 

and Research . . . . . . . . . . .140 

conserve natural resources

several strategies to achieve this goal. energy efficiently to preven

Our compliance assurance program the environment or human 

provides compliance assistance and We use science and researc

incentives, monitors compliance inform Agency policy decis

efforts and trends, and enforces guide our efforts to promot

against violators. Our pollution mental stewardship. To me

prevention programs and other domestic environmental cha

innovative partnerships promote self- we continue to cooperate a

directed action to minimize or coordinate with our interna

eliminate pollution before it is partners to promote enviro

generated. We also work with other stewardship globally. 

nations, including key international In cooperation with ou

trading partners, as they develop and we use four tools to maxim

enforce their own environmental ance: provide assistance to 

protection programs. Increasing understanding of environm

environmental compliance in other regulations; offer incentive

countries will lead to lower levels of encourage facilities volunta

pollution that can cross borders and identify, disclose, and corr

affect the United States. tions; monitor compliance 

We use the term “environ­ inspections, evaluations, a

mental stewardship” to describe the investigations; and conduc

sense of responsibility and ownership that goes with not criminal enforcement actions to correct violatio

only meeting, but exceeding, existing regulatory deter future non-compliance. 
130 

OBJECTIVE 5.1: ACHIEVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTEC

THROUGH IMPROVED COMPLIANCE 

BY 2011, MAXIMIZE COMPLIANCE TO PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND THE 

ENVIRONMENT THROUGH ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER COMPLIANCE ASSURAN

ACTIVITIES BY ACHIEVING A 5 PERCENT INCREASE IN THE POUNDS OF POLLU

REDUCED, TREATED, OR ELIMINATED BY REGULATED ENTITIES, INCLUDING T

INDIAN COUNTRY.

2 (BASELINE: 3-YEAR ROLLING AVERAGE FYS 2003-2005: 

900,000,000 POUNDS.) 

Sub-objective 

5.1.1: Compliance 

Assistance. By 2011, 

prevent noncompliance or reduce 

environmental risks, 

with an emphasis on 

achieving results in 

all areas including 

those with potential 

environmental justice 

concerns, through 

EPA compliance assistance by maintaining 

or improving on the 

following percentages 

for direct assistance provided to regulated 

entities, including those in Indian country: 

50 percent of the regulated entities receiving 

direct assistance improve environmental 

management practices;3 and 12 percent of the 

regulated entities receiving direct assistance 

reduce, treat, or eliminate pollution. 

(Baselines are determined each year based on 

prior year results.) 

Sub-objective 5.1.2: Compliance I

By 2011, identify and correct nonc

and reduce environmental risks, w

emphasis on achieving results in a

including those with potential env

justice concerns. Use of complianc

tives will result in a 5 percentage p

increase in the number of facilities 

EPA incentive policies to conduct 

mental audits or other actions tha

treat, or eliminate pollution or imp

environmental management pract

their facilities, including those in 

country. (Baseline: 3-year rolling a

FYs 2003-2005: 940 facilities.) 

Sub-objective 5.1.3: Monitorin

Enforcement. By 2011, identify, 

and deter noncompliance and red

environmental risks, with an emp

achieving results in all areas incl

those with potential environmen

concerns, through monitoring an

ment of regulated entities’ compl
baseline: 28.8 percent); and a 5 percentage 

point increase in the percent of enforcement actions requiring improvement of 

environmental management practices. 

(FY 2005 baseline: 72.5 percent.) 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE 

Environmental laws can achieve their 

purposes only when facilities and companies 

comply with requirements. Facilities and 

companies that do not comply can gain an 

unfair economic advantage over those that 

do invest the resources necessary to meet 

their environmental obligations. EPA works 

with state, tribal, and local agencies to secure 

and maintain compliance with the nation’s 

environmental laws and regulations. 

Over the next 5 years, we will continue 

working with state, tribal, and local environmental compliance assurance programs to: 

•	 Ensure a consistent level of effort 

among state and tribal enforcement 

and compliance assurance programs. 

•	 Identify national priorities for 

enforcement and compliance. 

•	 Better integrate state, tribal, regional, 

and national strategic planning 

efforts. 

•	 Share information about patterns of 

noncompliance or emerging risks 

which need to be addressed. 

•	 Explore opportunities for developing 

common performance measures for 

state and tribal enforcement and 

compliance assurance programs. 

•	 Continue to ensure compliance 

in Indian country by improving 

data collection and reporting and 

by building tribal capacity for managing compliance and enforcement 

programs. 

We will also work with some of our 

state and tribal partners, and with the U.S. 

Departments of State, Justice, the Interior, 

and other federal agencies, to encourage 

other countries’ efforts to develop and ensure 

compliance with their own domestic 

environmental programs. 

COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE 

EPA will continue to assist the regulated 

community in complying with environmental 

laws and regulations by providing training, 

workshops, on-site visits, and telephone contacts. Our 14 virtual Compliance Assistance 

Centers (www.epa.gov/compliance/ 

assistance/centers/index.html) provide assistance directly to regulated entities and offer 

access to resources such as pollution prevention information. We will also provide 
132 

Pounds in Millions 

on best practices, new compliance assistance 

materials, and performance measurement. 

As part of our compliance assistance, we 

also encourage environmental stewardship 

by establishing partnership programs designed 

to minimize or eliminate the generation 

of pollution. 

Through the Environmental Assistance 

Network, we will continue to coordinate 

EPA’s efforts to assist specific industry sectors, 

such as health care or construction, in 

improving their environmental performance. 

The Network brings EPA programs together 

around specific sectors to identify opportunities for common metrics and measures and to 

develop coordinated approaches for providing 

assistance, preventing pollution, and 

promoting environmental stewardship. 

Estimated Pollutant Reduction Commitments


Obtained Through Formal Case Conclusions


1,200 

1,000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

1,100 

1,000 

600 

260 

660 

Fiscal Year 

FY 2005 Data Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), & Manual Calculations, October 27, 2005 

Disclaimer: Due to enhanced data quality reviews, minor corrections may have been made to previously reported data. 

As such, this FY 2005 end-of-year report contains updated enforcement and compliance data for prior years. 

correct te, ad prevet recurr

lems. The Small Business Complia

for example, allows businesses with 

than 100 employees reduced penal

discovering, disclosing, and correc

violations. We will continue to ma

Audit Policy (Self-Policing Policy

pliance incentives such as reduced 

for violations and extended time f

tion available to the regulated com

We will also encourage owners of 

facilities to enter into corporate-w

auditing agreements, which offer t

opportunity to review their operat

comprehensively while providing c

about their environmental liability

Corporate-wide auditing agreemen

particularly those following merge

and acquisitions, offer the potentia

significant environmental benefits 

because environmental complianc

are addressed simultaneously acros

the corporation. 

COMPLIANCE MONITORING AN

ENFORCEMENT 

Federal environmental regulat

establish a consistent baseline for 

levels nationwide. States and tribe

been delegated responsibility for sp

programs may set more stringent s

and enforce against them. 

At the national level, EPA wi

strategic targeting to conduct mon

enforcement activities—inspection

tions, civil and criminal investigat
number of national priorities that focus on priorities for attention. 

significant environmental risks and patterns 

OBJECTIVE 5.2: IMPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 

THROUGH POLLUTION PREVENTION AND OTHER 

STEWARDSHIP PRACTICES 

BY 2011, ENHANCE PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND 

INCREASE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES BY PROMOTING POLLUTION 

PREVENTION AND THE ADOPTION OF OTHER STEWARDSHIP PRACTICES BY 

COMPANIES, COMMUNITIES, GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS. 

Sub-objective 5.2.1: Prevent Pollution and 

Promote Environmental Stewardship. By 

2011, reduce pollution, conserve natural 

resources, and improve other environmental 

stewardship practices while reducing costs 

through implementation of EPA’s pollution 

prevention programs. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, reduce 4.5 billion pounds of 

hazardous materials cumulatively 

compared to the 2000 baseline of 

44 million pounds reduced. 

•	 By 2011, reduce, conserve, or offset 

31.5 trillion British Thermal Units 

(BTUs) cumulatively compared to 

the 2002 baseline of 0 BTUs reduced, 

conserved, or offset. 

•	 By 2011, reduce water use by 

19 billion gallons cumulatively 

compared to the 2000 baseline of 

220 million gallons reduced. 

•	 By 2011, save $791.9 million through 

pollution prevention improvements 

in business, institutional, and governmental costs cumulatively compared 

to the 2002 baseline of $0.0 saved. 

•	 By 2011, reduce 4 million pounds of 

priority chemicals from waste streams 

as measured by National Partnership 

for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) 

contributions, Supplemental 

Environmental Projects (SEPs), and 

other tools used by EPA to achieve 

priority chemical reductions. 

Sub-objective 5.2.2: Promote Improved 

Environmental Performance Through 

Business and Community Innovation. 

Through 2011, improve environmental performance with sustainable outcomes through 

sector-based approaches, performance-based 

programs, and assistance to small business. 
134 

gases; 300 tons of toxic discharges to 

water; and 5,500 tons of combined 

NO

x, SOx, V

OC, and PM emissions. 

(Performance Track member facilities 

make commitments to, and report 

yearly progress on, performance 

improvements in up to four environmental areas. In FY 2005, 

Performance Track members 

achieved normalized annual 

reductions of 3.4 billion gallons in 

water use; 8,794 tons of hazardous 

materials use; 151,129 MTCO

2E 

of greenhouse gases; 186 tons of toxic 

discharges to water; and 3,533 tons 

of combined NO

x, SOx, V

OC, 

and PM emissions.) 

•	 By 2011, the participating manufacturing and service sectors in the 

Sector Strategies Program will 

achieve an aggregate 10 percent 

reduction in environmental releases 

to air, water, and land, working from 

a 2004 baseline and normalized to 

reflect economic growth. (Baseline 

and normalization factors to be 

developed by December 2006.) 

as regulated entities. Specifically, b

innovation projects under the Stat

Innovation Grant Program and ot

mechanisms will achieve, on avera

percent or greater improvement in 

mental results (such as reductions 

water discharges, improvements in 

air or water air quality, or improve

compliance rates), or a 5 percent o

improvement in cost effectiveness 

efficiency. (Each project’s achievem

be measured by the goals establish

grantee’s proposal. Baselines for am

conditions or pollutant discharges 

compliance will be developed at th

ning of each project, and improve

each project will be measured afte

implementation of the innovative 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 

EPA is committed to developi

promoting innovative strategies th

better environmental results, redu

and promote environmental stewa

In collaboration with states and tr

will continue to focus on innovati

will help small businesses and com

improve both their environmental 

economic performance. 

The Pollution Prevention Act 

encourages prevention and source 

as preferred methods for keeping p

from release to the environment. E
Grant Program. Annually, EPA provides 

approximately $5 million to states and tribes 

to support their efforts to provide industry 

with technical assistance, information 

sharing, and outreach. 

As mandated by Executive Order 13101, 

we will work with federal agencies to ensure 

that their purchasing decisions minimize 

damage to the environment. Through 

our Environmentally Preferable Purchasing 

Program (www.epa.gov/epp), and such initiatives as the Federal Electronics Challenge 

(www.federalelectronicschallenge.net) and 

the Electronic Products Environmental 

Assessment Tool (www.epeat.net/ and 

http://epa.gov/oppt/epp/pubs/products/ 

epeat.htp), we will continue to promote 

purchasing, operating, and disposing of 

electronic products in ways that protect the 

environment. In addition, we will work with 

our partners and key stakeholders to enhance 

international awareness and use of pollution 

prevention measures and environmental 

stewardship approaches, in particular 

by focusing on key trading partner countries 

that are major emitters of critical 

transboundary pollutants. 

Our Innovations Strategy relies on 

continued outreach to states, tribes, and 

businesses to help identify innovative 

approaches that merit testing, evaluation, 

and implementation. To provide leadership 

on the cutting edge of environmental policy, 

EPA works continually to identify, test, and 

implement innovative strategies that are 

effective and efficient. Some innovations 

more flexible permitting approaches, and 

encourage states to adopt new strategies. 

IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL 

PERFORMANCE 

EPA will advance environmental 

protection through innovative and 

collaborative approaches with business and 

government that produce measurable 

environmental results. For example, our 

National Environmental Performance Track 

Program is a public-private partnership that 

encourages continuous environmental 

improvement through the use of environmental management systems, local 

community involvement, and measurable 

environmental results. Performance Track 

motivates high-performing facilities to measurably reduce their environmental footprint 

beyond legal requirements and changes the 

way government regulates these facilities. 

Through the Performance Track Program, we 

will establish new relationships with business 
136 

all the program is intended to promote 

environmental stewardship while minimizing 

regulatory burden, individual sector projects 

address our specific air, water, land, and 

ecosystem objectives as well. The Sectors 

Strategy Program supports the Administrator’s 

goal to “accelerate the pace of environmental 

protection” by addressing the “driver and 

barrier” factors in each sector that affect environmental management decisions. We will 

emphasize results and accountability by tracking sector-wide trends in pollutant emissions 

and resource conservation in the Sector 

Strategies Performance Report, available at 

www.epa.gov/sectors/performance.html. 

EPA will continue to promote widespread 

use of environmental management systems 

(EMSs) domestically and internationally. 

EMSs provide a structured system and 

approach for managing environmental 

the private and public sectors. 

We also remain committed to 

and testing new approaches to imp

environmental performance by par

with states, tribes, and industry th

State Innovation Grant Program. 

this grant program to fund project

mote innovative approaches to pe

improve corporate environmental 

ance. One example of an innovati

receiving a State Innovation Gran

Environmental Results Program, a

first developed by the Commonwe

Massachusetts to regulate small so

as drycleaners and printers more c

tively. We will measure and track 

the State Innovation Grant progra

requiring grantees to include perfo

measures in project planning, to re

regularly on implementation of th

and to file a final report on results 

We plan to conduct an evaluation 

State Innovation Grant Program b

COST SAVING TECHNOLOGIES 

THAT PREVENT POLLUTION 

We will continue to conduct E

grams to prevent pollution while r

economic savings: 

•	 Our Green Chemistry Pro

supports research and foste

tive chemical technologie

prevent pollution in a scie

sound, cost-effective mann
• The Presidential Green Chemistry


Challenge Award Program recognizes
 Pound

600 

superior achievement in the design 

of chemical products and encourages 

chemical designers to prevent 

pollution, conserve water, and 

reduce energy use in achieving 

measurable results. 

•	 Our Design for the Environment6 

Industry Partnership Program offers 

technology assessments and outreach 

to encourage businesses to adopt 

cleaner, cheaper, and smarter 

pollution prevention practices. 

We will continue to work with industry 

sectors to measure results in reducing risks to 

human health and the environment, improve 

performance, and save costs associated with 

existing and alternative pollution prevention 

technologies or processes. 

WASTE MINIMIZATION 

To reduce priority chemicals in wastes 

going to landfills, EPA focuses on key waste 

streams and waste generators. For example, 

through the NPEP, a part of the Agency’s 

Resource Conservation Challenge, we will 

encourage state and local governments, 

manufacturers, and other nongovernmental 

organizations to form partnerships to reduce 

the generation of waste containing any of the 

31 priority chemicals. Companies that 

become NPEP partners are publicly 

recognized for their contribution to the 

national waste reduction goal. 

400 

200

 0 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 

Year 

We will continue to protect the environment and children’s health through 

innovative and collaborative approaches that 

produce measurable environmental results. 

Our Schools Chemical Cleanout Campaign 

will help to decrease the number of injuries 

and school days lost due to poor chemical 

management and chemical spills. Working 

with other federal agencies, states, tribes, and 

local governments, we will provide technical 

assistance and grant funding to clean out 

chemicals and prevent future chemical 

management problems. 

PREVENTING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 

THROUGH NEPA REVIEW 

Working with the White House Council 

on Environmental Quality, EPA will prevent 

adverse environmental impacts associated 

with large federal projects subject to National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review7

. 

Section 309 of the Clean Air Act requires 

EPA to review and make public its comments 

on the environmental impacts of other federal 

agencies. We will also assist other federal 

agencies developing environmental impact 

statements, help them develop projects to 

2010 201
138

The environmental and public 

health issues facing tribes are a priority 

for EPA, and one focus of our effort to 

group recommendations. 

OBJECTIVE 5.3: IMPROVE HUMAN HEALTH AND THE 

ENVIRONMENT IN INDIAN COUNTRY 

PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT ON TRIBAL LANDS BY AS

FEDERALLY-RECOGNIZED TRIBES TO BUILD ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT C

ASSESS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND MEASURE RESULTS, AND IMPLEME

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS IN INDIAN COUNTRY. 

Strategic Targets 

•	 By 2011, increase the percent 

of tribes implementing federal 

environmental programs in 

Indian country to 9 percent. 

(FY 2005 baseline: 5 percent 

of 572 tribes.) 

•	 By 2011, increase the percent 

of tribes conducting EPAapproved environmental 

monitoring and assessment 

activities in Indian country to 

26 percent. (FY 2005 baseline: 

20 percent of 572 tribes.) 

•	 By 2011, increase the percent 

of tribes with an environmental 

program to 67 percent.9 

(FY 2005 baseline: 54 percent 

of 572 tribes.) 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES F

IMPROVING HEALTH AND T

ENVIRONMENT IN INDIAN 

Under federal environmen

statutes, EPA is responsible fo

ing human health and the env

in Indian country. Our Ameri

Environmental Office (AIEO

an Agency-wide effort to work 

572 federally-recognized tribes

as intertribal consortia,10 locat

EPA’s 10 regions. The land in 

country totals more than 70 m

acres, and reservations range f

than 10 to more than 14 milli

EPA’s strategy for achievin

objectives in Indian country h

major components. First, we w

continue to distribute Indian 

Assistance Program (GAP) ca

building grants. GAP grants h
cover the cost of planning, developing, and 

establishing environmental protection 

programs. Our goal is help every federallyrecognized tribe establish an environmental 

presence. To demonstrate the results 

achieved by these funds more effectively, 

we are developing more and better environmental and public health measures to track 

tribal environmental progress. 

Second, we will develop the information 

technology infrastructure needed to assess 

environmental conditions in Indian country 

and measure the results achieved by the 

environmental programs operating on those 

and related lands. The Tribal Program 

Enterprise Architecture (TPEA) complements GAP by organizing environmental 

data on a tribal basis and providing a picture 

of current environmental conditions at the 

local level. As tribes assume management of 

their own environmental programs (through 

the “treatment in a manner similar to a state” 

process available under several environmental 

statutes or by developing a tribal program 

under tribal law), they will be able to use 

TPEA data to help identify program 

priorities. We will continue to coordinate 

EPA’s efforts with those of other federal 

agencies (including the U.S. Department of 

the Interior’s Geological Survey and Bureau 

of Reclamation and the U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services’ Indian 

Health Service) to create a comprehensive, 

Indian lands.

In reaching out to tribes, 

EPA’s water, air, land, pollution 

prevention, and enforcement and compliance 

programs have developed specific tribal 

strategies. As part of our strategic planning, 

we will continue to consult and collaborate 

with tribes. The Tribal Caucus, which has 

provided input to EPA on tribal issues for 

several years, will continue to serve as our 

focal point and help develop and strengthen 

EPA-tribal partnerships. We will also engage 

other EPA-sponsored tribal groups, such as 

the Tribal Committee of the Forum on State 

and Tribal Toxics Action, the Tribal 

Pesticides Program Council, the Tribal 

Science Council, the National Tribal Air 

Association, and the Tribal Water Council. 

Beyond improving environmental conditions in Indian country, our engagement with 

the tribes will support their work as the first 

stewards of our nation’s environment. All of 

EPA’s environmental programs will benefit by 

integrating tribal stewardship perspectives. 
140 

MEANS AND STRATEGIES FOR 

ENHANCING 

SUSTAINABILITY 

THROUGH SCIENCE AND RESEARCH 

The principles of environmental stewardship are based on the belief that our nation’s 

natural resources are the common property of 

all society. Effective stewards of the environment enhance environmental protection and 

achieve sustainable outcomes. Science and 

research programs supporting this strategic 

goal help identify efficient and sustainable 

practices, materials, and technologies to 

improve environmental performance and 

advance stewardship. 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FO

SUSTAINABILITY 

The Science and Technology 

Sustainability (STS) research prog

develops models, tools, and techno

provide decision makers with optio

can promote stewardship and lead 

able outcomes. STS research will a

measurable results by providing th

science and technology that can c

innovation and advance environm

protection; developing more effici

sustainable practices, materials, an

nologies; and providing science to 

sound management decisions, poli

practices for sustainable resource m

ment. Fundamental research unde

program includes developing Life C

Assessment and Material Flow An

methodologies; theoretical modeli

sustainable systems; developing ne

based sustainability metrics and in

and the People, Prosperity, and th

Student Design Competition prog

STS research will support the 

community in implementing more 

sustainable, and protective practic

using materials and technologies t

improve performance while protec

environment. We will work with o

partners to research new methods, 

chemicals, and industrial practices 

develop tools, for example, that be

chemists can use to evaluate the e

mental dimensions of new chemic
which draws on economics, ecology, law, and 

engineering to find systems-based solutions to 

regional environmental problems. 

ECONOMICS AND DECISION SCIENCES 

EPA’s Economics and Decision Sciences 

(EDS) research provides methods and data to 

conduct economic analyses and evaluate the 

effectiveness of our policies. The results of 

strategies for changing behavior, helping us 

to promote compliance, improved performance, and environmental stewardship. 

Finally, we will conduct EDS research on 

using trading programs for new pollutants, 

media, or geographical areas. This research 

will help design market-based programs to 

improve environmental performance at the 

lowest cost. We will also be investigating the 

implications that trading programs may have 

for environmental justice issues 

HUMAN CAPITAL 

To achieve our goals for compliance and 

environmental stewardship, we must be 

proficient in a number of areas. Our staff 

must understand applicable requirements, 

possess sector-specific knowledge about 

business and industrial processes, keep 

current on best practices, and be able to 

assess a situation and advise regulated entities 

seeking help and guidance. 

To improve our interaction with the 

regulated community, we will recruit skilled 

facilitators and communicators, and we will 

encourage current employees to take advantage 

of rotations and other opportunities at the 

state and local level. Experience in addressing 

local or regional problems will provide staff a 

broader perspective on the challenges facing 

regulators and the regulated community. We 

recognize that a broad spectrum of regulatory 

and stewardship approaches will be necessary 

to advance environmental protection and that 

a well-informed EPA workforce, skilled in 

collaborative approaches, will be the key 

to our success. 

To conduct our compliance assistance 

program and develop incentives for compliance, EPA attorney-advisors, engineers, 

environmental protection specialists, and others review material submitted by the regulated 

community, assess compliance, and craft the 

Agency’s response, which could include fines 

or penalties. EPA will work to ensure that 

staff have the necessary skill sets to carry out 

compliance monitoring and enforcement programs (including inspections), civil and 

criminal investigations, and administrative 

and judicial enforcement actions. 
142 

OMB’s Program Assessment Rating Tool 

(PART) assessment of the compliance program. We have also incorporated the PART 

long-term, outcome-oriented measures for 

EPA’s GAP grants into this Strategic Plan. To track our annual 

progress toward our 

research objectives, we 

will use a number of 

objective measures of 

customer satisfaction, 

product impact and quality, and efficiency. For 

example, we rely on 

independent expert 

review panel ratings, 

client surveys on the usefulness of our products, 

and analyses demonstrating the actual use of EPA 

research products. 

IMPROVING 

PERFORMANCE 

MEASUREMENT 

For the compliance objective of Goal 5, 

EPA will begin a process for redesigning the 

objective, sub-objectives, and measures. This 

redesign will change the focus of the program, 

moving from a tool-oriented approach that 

measures outcomes from assistance, incentives, 

monitoring, and enforcement, to a problemoriented approach that measures the extent to 

which key environmental problems are 

reduced or eliminated. To more accurately 

characterize the state of compliance for particular sectors and regulations, our compliance 

program uses statistically-valid compliance 

information that characterizes the 

presented by pollutants and poten

exposure. We are using air pollutio

to estimate the human health ben

reduced air pollutants. As a result, 

2005, the compliance assurance pr

reported that the 10 largest air pol

cases produced annual human hea

valued at more than $4.6 billion d

reducing pollutants by more than 

pounds annually. The compliance 

programs will continue working to

expand the types of information o

health benefits that can be reporte

pollution cases, and we are explori

tunities to report similar informati

cases involving other environmen

EPA will use a set of nationally 

environmental justice indicators of h

environment, compliance, and dem

identify “Areas with Potential Envir

Concerns.” We will then emphasize 

in these areas. This effort will better 

communities, including minority an

income communities. We will repor

impact of our compliance efforts on 

including minority and/or low-incom

nities. Based on our experience with 

indicators, we will develop specific e

mental justice measures and targets 

compliance assurance activities. 

EPA is committed to developi

ingful performance measures that w

allow us to assess our pollution pre

programs. We will continue to col

with states and tribes to improve o

performance measures and, throug

PART process, review and refine t

be more outcome oriented. 
cess is not proving easily sustainable, 

however, as we have begun to exhaust the 

more obvious opportunities for waste minimization. Achieving future reductions will be 

more difficult and require a different 

approach. We are working with states to 

develop an approach that targets sectors and 

will allow more direct technology transfer 

between facilities involved in similar 

industrial processes. 

The Harvard Regulatory Policy Program 

evaluated several aspects of EPA’s 

Performance Track Program, including differences among facilities applying for the 

program, characteristics of facilities motivated 

to apply, and the differences in environmental performance between Track members and 

non-members. The evaluation affirmed the 

value of EPA recognition as an incentive for 

and the branding associated with the 

program, and we will identify firms that 

are providing environmental leadership 

and refocus our recruiting efforts at the 

corporate level. 

EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance 

Program has undergone three PART assessments since FY 2003: civil enforcement 

(2003), criminal enforcement (2004), and 

pesticides grants (2005). OMB recommendations resulting from these PART assessments 

have been focused on individual program 

areas and limited to certain aspects of the 

Enforcement and Compliance Program’s 

management. The program will continue 

to improve and refine outcome measurement 

and to expand use of statistically-valid 

compliance rates. These activities are directly 

related to PART follow-up actions. 
144 

the cognitive and behavioral sciences

Developing and applying nanotechnologies, 

biotechnologies, and sensor technologies 

could significantly enhance our ability to 

protect human health and the environment. 

Progress in these areas will also determine 

the future direction of our research programs. 

Advances in measurement technology 

could also have a significant effect on EPA 

programs. As more sensitive technology for 

detecting and measuring emissions is 

installed in facilities, emissions reporting will 

become more accurate. As a result, we may 

find emission rates to be higher or lower than 

previously reported. 

improving data quality; enabling d

gration; and facilitating data acces

sharing. Sensors might also facilita

acquisition and use of empirical da

aid in tracking and analyzing the f

materials and elements throughou

industrial cycle. 

Nanotechnology could presen

opportunities for pollution preven

environmental stewardship (see 

www.epa.gov/osa/nanotech.htm). E

nanotechnology applications could 

reduce energy demand, develop cl

energy, and improve the efficiency 

facturing processes, reducing mate

waste generation. Pollution preven

grams can provide a forum for indu

academia to exchange information 

environmental effects and benefits 

innovative nanomaterials and prom

environmentally responsible manu

processes and product design. A gr

number of institutional players are 

ing policymakers to study nanotec

and develop responses. 

These emerging technolog

also present novel risks. Anticipat

risks and developing tools to ident

them will become increasingly imp

as these technologies develop and 

marketplace. 
EPAs Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Washington, DC. Access July 25, 2006. 

3.	 “Environmental management practices” refers to a specific set of activities EPA tracks to evaluate changes 

brought about through assistance, incentives, and concluded enforcement actions. Implementing or improving 

environmental management practices—for example, by changing industrial processes; discharges; or testing, 

auditing, and reporting—may assist a regulated facility in remaining in compliance with environmental requirements. Further information on environmental management practices is available in EPA’s Case Conclusion Data 

Sheet Training Booklet, available online at: www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/planning/ 

caseconc.pdf: EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Washington, DC. 

4.	 Complying actions are actions taken by a facility to address deficiencies, which are potential violations, identified during on-site inspections and evaluations. Examples of a complying action include correcting record 

keeping deficiencies, requesting a permit application, improving pollutant identification (labeling, manifesting, 

etc.), improving management practices (storage, training, etc.) or reducing pollution through use reduction, 

industrial process change, or emissions or discharge change. 

5.	 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Green Chemistry Web Site, www.epa.gov/greenchemistry. 

Washington, DC. Access September 9, 2006. 

6.	 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Design for the Environment Web Site: www.epa.gov/dfe. 

Washington, DC. Access September 9, 2006. 

7.	 U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. National Environmental Policy Act Web Site: 

www.epa.gov/compliance/basics/nepa.html#requirement. Washington, DC. Access September 9, 2006. 

8.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal lands,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” within this 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is 

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

9.	 A tribe is counted as having an environmental program for the purposes of this measure if the tribal government has taken at least one of the following actions, in combination with having “an organizational structure 

which includes EPA-funded environmental office or coordinator that has been staffed in the most recent year”: 

(a)	 Complete a Tier III TEA, as evidenced by a document signed by the tribal government and EPA. 

(b) Establish environmental laws, codes, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, policies, or environmental compliance programs, as evidenced by a document signed by the tribal government. 

(c)	 Complete solid and/or hazardous waste implementation activities. 

(d) Complete an inter-governmental environmental agreement (e.g., state-tribe MOA, federal-tribe MOA, 

etc). 

10.	 Intertribal consortia are groups of federally-recognized tribes that meet the criteria for EPA purposes that join 

to work together. 

11.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal lands,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” within this 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being described, nor is 

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

Cross-Goal 

Strategies 
Strategies


Many of EPA’s efforts—strengthening our partner- Each of these efforts is a significant compo

ships with states and tribes, improving the quality and our work and plays a critical role in the accom

availability of the environmental and health information of all of our goals. This chapter highlights a few 

on which we base our decisions, and improving our cross-goal strategies: Partnerships, Information

management systems to achieve better 

CONTENTS

Results and

Accountability: . . . . . . . . . .149 

Innovation and

Collaboration: . . . . . . . . . .152 

Best Available Science: . . .158

Innovation, Human Capit

results—contribute to our progress Science, Homeland Securi

toward all five of our goals. This Economic and Policy Ana

cross-Agency, cross-media work each, we will discuss the A

includes both support functions, such approach, explain how the 

as administrative and financial management or legal 

services, and the strategies or means we employ to help 

accomplish our objectives, such as science and research or 

information management. 

will contribute to the achievement of our goals

describe some of the activities we will conduct 

we hope to achieve using this approach. 

148
marketbasedwe are working to improve 

the efficiency and effectiveness of our 

programs and activities. We are continuing 

to make progress under each of the PMA 

initiatives and other significant efforts to 

improve program effectiveness and efficiency 

as described below. 

ASSESSING THE STATE OF THE 

ENVIRONMENT AND MEASURING 

PROGRESS 

To define our goals, measure our progress, 

and hold managers accountable for achieving 

results, EPA needs accurate, timely environmental data. Based on the preliminary work 

we did to prepare EPA’s Draft Report on the 

Environment—2003, we are developing and 

using a suite of scientifically sound indicators 

to track trends in environmental conditions 

and environmental influences on human 

health. This indicator information, which we 

will present in our Report on the 

Environment—Technical Document (to be 

released in 2007), will provide a snapshot of 

current environmental conditions and a 

baseline against which we can measure 

our accomplishments. 

Our environmental indicators work is 

critical to EPA’s strategic planning. We 

have used our latest set of environmental 

indicators in developing this Strategic Plan; 

indicator information has guided us in 

establishing our 2006-2011 strategic goals, 

objectives, sub-objectives, and associated 

strategic targets, which define the measurable 

environmental results we are trying 

qualityWe will continue to use environmen

tal indicator information and our Report on 

the Environment to determine critical data 

needs for future strategic planning. 

MAKING INFORMATION 

MORE ACCESSIBLE 

EPA’s information systems ensure that we 

and our federal, state, tribal, and local agency 

partners have the accurate, timely information we need to make sound decisions. 

To make environmental information readily 

accessible, we have created a computer 

network that connects EPA and our contractors with states and tribes, standardized our 

computer systems, implemented data 

standards, and instituted a variety of 

streamlining efforts. 
150 

example, our geospatial work is 

converting millions of pieces of 

data into maps. 

•	 Governance. We will ensure that the 

data EPA collects are of appropriate 

quality and design, that the data 

will serve many users, and that we 

minimize system overlaps to avoid 

conflict and reduce costs. 

•	 Excellence in Information Service 

Delivery. EPA will use the latest technology to streamline management 

and data processes and link data 

partners, making information more 

accessible to all. 

•	 Innovation in Information 

Management. Through electronic 

government (E-Gov) efforts, we will 

continue to convert paper-based 

administrative or regulatory processes 

into electronic systems, improving 

transparency and accessibility, and 

reducing paper waste. INTEGRATING BUDGET AND PERFORMANCE INFORMATION 

One of the first 

federal agencies to 

link our planning 

and budgeting structures, EPA is now 

working to align 

our financial and 

ance across EPA, we have develop

long-term measures of program per

in our Strategic Plan that establish 

yet reasonable expectations for fut

environmental outcomes. These lo

measures establish the framework 

annual performance and efficiency 

that meet Office of Management a

Budget’s Program Assessment Rati

requirements. EPA collects and an

performance information against t

measures to assess program perform

time and to evaluate the effectiven

approaches to environmental prob

Based on these evaluations, we can 

modify our strategies to achieve be

To encourage EPA staff and our 

be accountable for delivering enviro

results effectively and cost efficien

also incorporating performance me

EPA managers’ performance agree

as appropriate, in our contracts, gr

memoranda of understanding. The

performance measures strengthen 

connection between an individual

organization’s contribution and th

of environmental results. Linking 

and our partners’ performance to E

mission, goals, and expectations fo

mental outcomes increases everyon

commitment to improving results. IMPROVING FINANCIAL PERFOR

AND 

ELIMINATING IMPROPER P

EPA has undertaken a multi-o

integration effort which uses finan
environmental objectives. Next we will 

review emergency management and, in future 

efforts, analyze such key risk areas as debt 

management and contracts management. 

In another PMA initiative to improve 

our financial performance, we are working to 

eliminate improper payments. Under this 

effort we will identify, prevent, and eliminate 

erroneous payments and document that the 

government is using tax dollars for their 

intended purpose. While EPA’s improper payments are minimal, we are committed to 

reducing the error rate for improper payments 

even further. For example, in FY 2004 EPA’s 

error rate in the Drinking Water and Clean 

Water State Revolving Funds, 2 of EPA’s 

largest sources of grant funding, was 

0.51 percent, or $10.3 million; by the end 

of FY 2005 we reduced it to 0.16 percent, 

or $3.1 million. We will continue to 

uphold high standards of integrity for 

financial performance. 

MEETING HUMAN CAPITAL NEEDS 

EPA has designed our Human Capital 

Strategy to ensure that our workforce is highperforming, results-oriented, aligned with 

our strategic goals and objectives, and 

accountable for delivering environmental 

results consistent with the PMA. Toward this 

end, our human capital planning will require 

us to identify the skills we will need for 

future work, attract and retain diverse talent, 

provide continuing opportunities for organizational learning, develop leaders, and ensure 

adequate succession planning. 

ships with such 

partners as other federal agencies, state 

and local governments, tribes, 

grantees, contractors, 

and other stakeholders. We need to ensure 

that all available expertise is brought to bear 

to achieve our goals for protecting human 

health and the environment. 

Over the next 5 years, we anticipate a 

dramatic increase in “baby boomer” retirements across both the public and private 

sectors. To attract and retain the right people 

in the right jobs for both the short and long 

terms, we will work to elevate EPA’s profile as 

an employer of choice, increase our use of 

hiring flexibilities, and emphasize intern and 

career development programs. 

INCREASING EFFICIENCY THROUGH 

COMPETITIVE SOURCING 

Competitive sourcing—using competition 

to determine whether federal or private sector 

employees can most efficiently and effectively 

perform work that is not inherently governmental—is a key element of the PMA and 

EPA’s effort to deliver environmental results 

and ensure accountability. Competitive sourcing helps EPA determine the optimal mix of 

federal employees and contractor personnel 

for achieving the best results and highest 

quality of service for our investment. The 

competitive process drives innovation and 

efficiency, enabling us to reinvest resultant 

savings in high-priority activities. 
152 

the next 5 years. Over the next 3 years, we 

plan to conduct competitive sourcing 

competitions for additional information technology and administrative support services, 

and we anticipate that these competitions 

will save EPA 15-25 percent. INCREASING 

EFFICIENCY 

THROUGH 

ELECTRONIC 

GOVERNMENT (E-GOV) 

EPA is pursuing a 

number of opportunities 

for leveraging electronic 

tools and capabilities to 

provide one-stop access to 

services and transactions, 

reduce duplication in collecting information, and 

provide transparent, timely, on-line data. Whether 

E-Rulemaking initiative, we are co

the efforts of nine other agencies t

the rulemaking process. E-Rulema

the internet to make the rulemaki

more accessible to interested parti

federal rulemaking was once a pap

process, E Rulemaking now offers 

access and user services such as tex

document search capabilities and t

ability for the public to submit com

electronically. EPA’s system will se

template to improve existing “E-D

systems and will replace duplicativ

in many federal agencies. 

As a leader in E-Gov, we are h

simplify and unify common work p

across federal agencies and within 

will continue applying new princip

methods to achieve better results, 

customer service, and provide grea

to the American people. 

INNOVATION AND COLLABORATION 

EPA’s progress over the next several 

years will depend greatly on our ability and 

commitment to find more effective tools and 

approaches to meet today’s complex environmental challenges. Broad-based problems, 

such as polluted runoff, global climate 

change, and loss of habitat and biodiversity, 

are often the result of diffuse causes and 

cannot be solved fully with conventional 

regulatory controls. Rapid technological and 

scientific advances can bring breakthrough 

solutions, but also pose unknown o

unexpected environmental and pu

health risks. 

As EPA faces these complex c

and a tightening federal budget, w

ingly turn to two important strateg

cross all of our goals and programs

innovative solutions and collabora

others. In the coming years we mu

even more effectively with organiz

engaged in environmental issues, l
mote an ethic of environmental stewardship 

that engages all parts of society—businesses, 

companies, communities, and individuals—in 

taking responsibility for environmental quality and achieving sustainable results. 

Environmental stewardship is based on the 

premise that government cannot meet environmental challenges alone. Rather we 

need all parts of society to understand how 

environmental protection aligns with 

broader social and economic interests and 

to engage with us in actively creating a 

sustainable future. 

INNOVATING TO IMPROVE 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 

Innovation is key to environmental 

progress. Innovation involves developing 

new ideas, testing their effectiveness, and 

then determining useful applications. It also 

involves making proven approaches even 

more effective or adapting them to address 

other needs. To drive progress under this 

Strategic Plan, EPA’s innovation strategy is 

based on four elements. 

Promoting State and Tribal Innovation. 

Because states and tribes are on the frontlines 

of environmental protection, they are in the 

best position to recognize problems and craft 

innovative solutions. EPA is committed to 

supporting innovation in state and tribal 

programs in a variety of ways. For example, 

states participate in EPA’s Innovation Action 

Council. Through this senior-level policy 

forum, we jointly develop an innovation 

work plan that focuses attention on priority 

issues. Together, we are finding innovative 

approaches to program management 

challenges, such as developing total maximum daily loads for impaired water bodies or 

using alternative approaches for managing 

hazardous waste under the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act. 

We also support states through the 

competitive State Innovation Grant program 

which, since 2003, has provided funding to 

help states explore innovative approaches in 

three areas of mutual interest to EPA and 

states—environmental permitting, environmental management systems, and 

performance-based leadership programs. For 

example, these funds have been instrumental 

in helping states adapt an innovative 

approach to permitting first developed in 

Massachusetts. Today, 15 states are developing or applying programs similar to 

Massachusetts’ Environmental Results 

Program to improve environmental 

performance in small business sectors, such 

as dry cleaning and printing. 

Similarly, our Innovative Funding 

Workgroup, supported through EPA’s Indian 

Program Policy Council, is developing 

options for the strategic and innovative use of 

funding, resources, and other opportunities to 

effect environmental change. The workgroup 

seeks to understand all of the various mechanisms that EPA and other agencies are using 

or could use to enhance coordination and 

environmental protection in Indian country.

2 
154 

nance, and demolition.While many EPA programs 

work with the building and construction sectors to 

improve environmental performance, a cross-Agency 

Green Building Workgroup is bringing these programs 

together to share information, leverage resources, and 

pursue their common objectives with external stakeholders who have joined the green building 

movement.The Workgroup is a model of collaboration, and its emergence represents the kind of culture 

change that is called for in EPA’s Innovation Strategy. It 

shows how EPA recognized an external trend and is 

responding with a multimedia approach that can 

advance all five of our strategic goals. 

address these diverse issues–regula

policy, guidance, voluntary initiati

and compliance assistance. By exp

such options, we can create a mor

portfolio of solutions for these and 

future problems. 

Developing Problem-Solving Too

Approaches. EPA needs new tools 

approaches to solve existing enviro

protection problems and to preven

emergence of new ones. We believ

future environmental protection sy

rely less on technology requiremen

more on strategies tailored to addr

facilities, communities, or industry 

also will emphasize pollution preve

natural resource conservation. Ou

tion strategy focuses on developing 

will expand current capabilities, fo

by supporting environmental tech

innovation, increasing incentives, 

ing the use of environmental man

systems, and developing results-ori

performance goals and measures. 

Creating a Culture and Organiz

Systems to Foster Innovation. Unde

fourth element of our innovation 

we are working to foster innovatio

changing our organizational cultu

management systems. We recogni

to improve our planning, budgetin

accountability processes and inves

human capital. We are also comm

futures planning to ensure that we 

partners are aware of and ready to 

new trends and opportunities that 

environmental quality. 
Coaboratve approaces caproduce ore 

effective and durable decisions, because they 

generate a shared sense of ownership among 

the stakeholders who will implement them. 

Collaboration on data gathering and analysis 

boosts the potential for agreement and can 

transform our understanding of environmental problems. 

We will continue to enhance our capacity 

to collaborate with others, and we will 

increase our managers’ and staff’s “collaboration competency,” helping them know when 

and how to engage productively with others. 

Further, we are identifying new opportunities 

for involving stakeholders, making internal 

and external collaborative process experts 

more available to help facilitate complex 

decision making, and implementing a set 

of initiatives with other federal agencies 

to strengthen our collective ability to 

work with the public. 

With States 

The unique relationship between EPA and 

states is a cornerstone of the nation’s environmental protection system: working together, 

we have significantly improved environmental 

quality and public health. Delegated state 

programs conduct much of the day-to-day 

work involved in environmental programs— 

including issuing permits, conducting 

compliance and enforcement activities, and 

monitoring environmental conditions—and 

EPA oversees these activities. 

In addition to our partnerships with 

individual state environmental, public health, 

and agriculture agencies, EPA works at the 

national level with a variety of associations 

electronic equipment and services. Under this challenge, 

government agencies commit to making electronic purchases that meet certain environmental criteria, such as 

reduced use of toxic substances, virgin materials, and 

energy, thereby harnessing their considerable buying 

power to ensure that these greener goods are available 

for many other purchasers as well. 

representing state governments. These organizations provide the state perspective that EPA 

needs to shape policies and programs. We 

work closely with the National Governors 

Association, National Council of State 

Legislatures, and the Environmental Council 

of the States, as well as with groups representing managers of specific environmental media 

programs, such as the Association of State 

and Interstate Water Pollution Control 

Administrators. 

In 1995, EPA and state officials created 

the National Environmental Performance 

Partnership System, the foundation for our 

work with states. Through this system of 

performance-based partnerships, EPA and 

states are setting environmental priorities 

and program strategies, improving how we 

measure performance, implementing innovative solutions to environmental problems, 
156 

data while saving agencies time and money once 

spent on paper-based data entry and reporting. 

Since 2002, EPA has provided more than 

$80 million in grants to help states, as well as tribes 

and territories, develop this Web-based system. 

The results are revolutionizing the exchange of 

environmental data. Several states are 

now using the Exchange Network to 

allow industries to submit their water 

discharge monitoring reports 

electronically. Others are using 

it to provide the public with 

timely beach closure and 

advisory information. 

and strengthening data collection and 

management. Critical to this work is finding 

ways to maximize flexibility so that states can 

address their own priority needs while 

ensuring accountability for results. 

With Tribes 

EPA’s work with tribes is based on the 

recognition that tribes have unique cultural, 

jurisdictional, and legal issues that must be 

considered when coordinating and implementing environmental programs in Indian 

country. One of their cultural distinctions is a 

longstanding commitment to environmental 

stewardship. Native Americans recognize the 

importance of not only protecting the environment, but of pursuing a longer-term goal 

government structures and incorpo

tribal priorities to protect human h

the environment in Indian countr

As part of the National Tribal 

Committee, EPA’s Administrator, 

Administrator, and other senior A

officials work with 19 elected or ap

tribal leaders, who comprise the N

Tribal Caucus, to address environm

human health issues in Indian cou

EPA’s nine regions with federal Ind

have similar working relationships 

mechanisms in place for this purpo

With Local Governments 

Local governments are uniquel

tioned to collaborate with EPA, ot

agencies, and the private sector in 

ways to make life better for their c

Regulatory tools, such as land use p

authorities, building and health co

and other ordinances allow local g

to address problems falling outside 

state jurisdiction. At the national 

Local Government Advisory Com

vides advice and recommendations 

building state and local capacity to 

environmental services and progra

With Other Federal Agencies 

The President’s 2004 Executiv

Cooperative Conservation placed 

emphasis on the need for collabora

environmental problem-solving by 

for expanded cooperation among f

agencies with environmental and 

resource responsibilities. EPA will 

to be an active partner in Coopera
ensure that these skills are a part of hiring, deposited in the United States originates from training, and recognizing EPA employees. By outside of our borders, and water-borne dis­ implementing this plan, we will enhance ease is greater along the U.S.-Mexico border EPA’s capability to foster collaborative prob­ than in the rest of the United States due to lem-solving and attain our environmental inadequate wastewater treatment. We must and public health objectives. collaborate with our international partners to 

With Other Countries solve these and other problems. 

As our understanding of environmental Advance U.S. Interests Abroad. Our 

issues has increased, so has our appreciation shared goals for environmental protection 

of the need to partner with other countries can open doors between the United States 

on environmental goals. International coop- and foreign governments. Assisting other 

eration is vital to achieving our mission, and countries in their environmental protection 

EPA has established three strategic priority efforts can be an effective part of a larger 

areas for our international engagement. U.S. strategy for promoting sustainable 

LEARNING FROM LOCAL LEADERS

Bartow County, Georgia is a model for collaborative environmental problem-solving at the 

local level. A fast-growing area northwest of Atlanta, Bartow County is implementing the 

first county-wide environmental management system in the nation. Designed to significantly 

reduce pollution across the county, this program is the result of a partnership that includes 

six cities, two school districts, the local chamber of commerce, several industry leaders, and 

the agricultural community. Over the past several years, the county has conducted a baseline audit of environmental performance and has developed environmental management 

resources, such as a Web site database for tracking air emissions, waste minimization, and 

water quality, and an air quality “tool box” for local officials. Air emissions have already been 

reduced by 25 percent. Based on its results, the Bartow County program is gaining attention at all levels of government; it was among the models showcased at the 2005 White 

House Conference on Cooperative Conservation. 
158

tional marketplace. In particular, EPA works 

and countries continually improve. 

BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE 

Effective, proactive environmental 

protection requires a strong foundation of 

scientific knowledge. EPA uses the best available scientific approaches, data, and models 

to anticipate potential threats, evaluate risks, 

identify solutions, and develop standards that 

protect the environment and safeguard 

human health. Our science strategy is 

designed to generate the data we need 

to understand and manage risks and to 

guide research that can inform our 

decision making. 

ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS 

EPA works with states and tribes and 

across public and private sectors, drawing 

on the best scientific information available 

to help us ask the right questions and 

characterize problems clearly. 

Our intramural research progr

ducts leading-edge research to help 

understand the biological, physica

social, and other processes that dri

ronmental systems, and it provides 

fundamental scientific basis for ad

wide variety of environmental pro

example, our intramural research p

produces information used to cond

ments for EPA’s Integrated Risk In

System (IRIS), an electronic datab

information on human health effe

may result from exposure to variou

cals in the environment. IRIS is a 

risk assessment tool for EPA’s regu

grams, states, and industry. To guid

intramural program, EPA prepares 

research plans that set out the rese

we intend to achieve over a 5-10 y

and establish annual performance 

measures of our progress.3 

Each of EPA’s environmental p

supported by scientists and engine

specialized program knowledge. To

hydrologists, ecologists, and other 

apply best available science to imp

programs. For example, these expe

identify appropriate criteria for ass

water quality, set air pollutant stan

that protect human health, explai

and transport of pollutants in soil 

groundwater, or characterize comp

ecosystem responses to stress. 
work with us on environmental science 

issues in Indian country,

5 including research, 

monitoring, modeling, data, technology, 

and training. 

Our competitive Science to Achieve 

Results (STAR) program funds research 

grants and graduate fellowships in many 

environmental science and engineering 

disciplines. STAR engages the nation’s best 

scientists and engineers in targeted research 

that complements EPA’s intramural research 

program and those of our federal agency 

partners. Through this competitive process, 

we also periodically establish large research 

centers to address specific areas of national 

concern, such as children’s health, hazardous 

substances, particulate matter, and estuarine 

and coastal monitoring. 

EPA’s Science Inventory6 reflects the 

full range of our science activities: research, 

technical assistance, assessments, scientific 

and technical products, and peer reviews. 

A searchable catalogue of science activities, 

peer-reviewed products, and EPA archival 

records, the Inventory helps EPA scientists 

and managers track and coordinate scientific 

initiatives and serves as a resource for people 

interested in state-of-the-science at EPA. 

ASSURING SCIENCE QUALITY 

EPA’s quality assurance programs ensure 

the integrity of environmental data by overseeing monitoring programs, approving data 

collection activity plans, and evaluating monitoring and laboratory practices. For example, 

as part of EPA’s 2002 Information Quality 

Guidelines,7 we must ensure that the material 

our regulatory programs present to support risk 

assessments is comprehensive and informative. 

The information must be accessible enough to 

make our methodology, as well as our plans for 

identifying and evaluating risk, understandable 

to affected populations. 

A key strategy for assuring science 

quality is peer review, an EPA priority for 

many years. EPA’s Peer Review Policy8 

requires that major scientific and technical 

work products be reviewed by qualified, 

independent scientists outside of EPA. 

Peer review enhances credibility, uncovers 

technical problems, identifies additional 

information needs, and ensures that conclusions that follow from data comport with 

generally accepted scientific standards. 

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 

our Science Advisory Board (SAB), and the 

Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) are 

among the scientific organizations that 

review our products and advise EPA. 

USING SCIENCE CORRECTLY 

EPA organizes much of its scientific 

information around the principles of 

risk assessment and risk management. 

We conduct risk assessments to help us 

understand the relative size (magnitude) and 

likelihood (probability) of risk that environmental stressors, such as air pollution or 
160 

Source: EPA Office of Research and Development 

chemicals in drinking water, pose to human 

health and ecosystems. Risk management 

involves determining whether and how to 

reduce such risks. 

Risk assessment is critical to EPA’s work; 

we integrate risk assessments with economic 

data, engineering studies, and other information to provide the comprehensive scientific 

analyses we need to inform our decisions. 

Our Risk Assessment Forum, a standing 

committee of senior EPA scientists, focuses 

on fundamental, generic issues concerning 

risk assessments and related science policy 

and promotes Agency-wide consensus on 

difficult or controversial issues. EPA’s Risk 

Characterization Policy and Handbook9 

guides our scientists in characterizing risk 

assessments properly. 

Our Action Development Process also 

ensures that EPA’s decisions are well 

informed by sound science and high quality 

data. Through this process, EPA’s senior 

managers can consider a broad range of 

regulatory and non-regulatory options and 

analytic approaches in the earliest stages of 

project planning. The Action Development 

Process ensures that EPA scientists, 

economists, and other technical experts are 

appropriately involved in determining 

research and analysis needs, identifying 

alternatives, and selecting options. 

A number of entities within EPA support 

our science efforts: 

•	 The Office of Science Policy applies 

scientific expertise from within EPA’s 

Agency-wide science polic

The SPC has produced th

Genomics Action Plan, EP

Nanotechnology White P

the Risk Assessment Princ

Practices Staff Paper. 

•	 The Council on Regulator

Environmental Modeling 

developing and using envi

models. The Council has d

an inventory of the EPA m

that are used most frequen

and continues to promote 

transparent model design. 

Scientific information often inc

degree of uncertainty, inviting a div

interpretations. However, scientist

increasingly able to calculate and 

uncertainty. For example, states m

cite nutrients, pathogens, and sedi

the stressors contributing to impai

waters. But our ability to measure 

and infer their sources within wate

very limited, and the quantitative 

response data for sediments are vir

non-existent. As a result, uncertai

and it limits EPA’s and states’ abili

water quality goals. Accordingly, w

high value on research to address t

lems. Similarly, EPA places a high 

efforts to reduce the uncertainty a

with calculating the reference dose

concentration, or benchmark dose

Stochastic Human Exposure and D

Simulation model and the Exposu

Dose Estimating Model are two ex

promising physically-based probab

computer models designed to estim

exposure, absorbed dose, and elim
proveets pubc eatad ecoog

cal condition-fewer deaths from 

cardiovascular disease. 

Empirical observations and research are 

increasing our ability to measure the effectiveness of our programs and to adjust and 

improve them to gain efficiencies and meet 

our goals. We will continue to improve the 

ways we use existing information to assess our 

performance by strengthening systems that 

monitor environmental conditions and 

developing surveillance systems that track 

ecological or health outcomes. 

EPA’s Report on the Environment work has 

also advanced our performance measurement, 

using existing and new analytical information 

to describe current national environmental 

conditions and trends and identify additional 

research needs. The work we are doing to 

prepare our Report on the Environment— 

Technical Document (to be released in 2007) 

will further our efforts to frame innovative 

solutions to complex cross-goal issues and 

advance rigorous scientific approaches to 

measuring associated outcomes. 

Under the President’s Management 

Agenda initiative, EPA is applying explicit 

research and development (R&D) investment criteria to improve R&D program 

management, inform funding decisions, and 

increase public understanding of the benefits 

of their R&D investments. EPA’s R&D 

programs have well-conceived plans that 

identify program goals and priorities and are 

linked to regional and national needs. 

These plans are developed by Research 

Coordination Teams, comprising program 

office, regional, and research program representatives, to ensure strong coordination. 
162 

4.	 Refer to: http://intranet.epa.gov/ospintra/scienceportal/. 

5.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal lands,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being des

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 

6.	 Refer to: www.epa.gov/si. 

7.	 Refer to: www.epa.gov/quality/informationguidelines/. 

8.	 See “Peer Review and Peer Involvement at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency” and the second 

Peer Review Handbook, which provides detailed guidance for implementing the policy (www.epa.gov/p

9.	 Refer to: www.epa.gov/OSA/spc/pdfs/rchandbk.pdf. 
Social Costs


and Benefits

164 

analysis in our strategic planning, 

Presidential Executive Order 12866, 

“Regulatory Planning and Review,”1 requires 

EPA to use benefit-cost analysis when formulating economically significant regulations. 

Specifically, Executive Order 12866 directs 

that agencies “in choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches...should select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 

advantages, distributive impacts, and equity), 

unless a statute requires another regulatory 

approach.” In a similar manner, strategic 

goals and objectives also should reflect 

approaches that maximize net benefits and 

provide the best investment of society’s limited resources. 

EPA regularly publishes benefit-cost 

analyses of its proposed and final regulations, 

and the Office of Management and Budget 

also produces estimates of the economic consequences of federal regulations in its annual 

Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of 

Federal Regulations.

2 It is often very difficult to 

provide quantitative estimates of the costs, 

and particularly the benefits, of environmental 

NOTES 

Appendix 1 of EPA’s 2003-200

Plan described the social costs and 

its programs for the year 2002. Th

was limited largely because EPA’s e

models and tools have not been de

estimate the aggregate costs and b

achieving the kind of ambitious, b

term goals adopted in strategic pla

Although new analyses have n

performed for the 2006-2011 Strat

EPA will separately be providing a

information on some of the social 

benefits of its programs and policie

example, we anticipate releasing a 

Summer 2007 on the results of our 

Pollution Abatement Cost and Ex

Survey. Earlier versions of the surv

many of the estimates used in the 

Strategic Plan appendix, but results 

current survey will not be availabl

to be used in the 2006-2011 Strate

EPA’s 2003–2008 Strategic Plan So

and Benefits Appendix can be acc

www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/2003sp.pdf 

173-214). 

1.	 The Executive Order 12866—(Federal Register: September 30, 1993, Vol. 58, No. 190, Pg. 51735

accessed at: www.epa.gov/fedgstr/eo/eo1286.htm. 

2.	 OMB’s annual report to Congress can be accessed at: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/ 

regpol-reports_congress.html. 
Proposed Future


Program Evaluations

166 

way than day-to-day experience provides. 

Evaluating environmental programs enables 

strategic goals by goal and objectiv

GOAL 1 

Evaluation 

Topic 

Strategic Goal 

and Objective 

Proposed General Scope 

and Issues To Be Addressed 

T

Measuring 

Effectiveness of the 

Air Toxics 

Monitoring 

Program in the 

EPA Region 9 

office 

Goal 1, Objective 1 EPA is planning to conduct a systematic analysis 

of the effectiveness of its San Francisco regional 

office’s Air Toxics Monitoring Program in meeting program objectives. The evaluation will 

include analysis of data from several sources, 

which will be used to develop a logic model based 

on outcomes, resources, customers, and federal, 

state, local, and tribal activities. As a result of the 

evaluation, quantitative measures will more clearly link the region’s contributions to the national 

Air Toxics Program’s GPRA goals, and the assessment will be relevant to national program design 

developments. 

FY 

GOAL 2 

Evaluation 

Topic 

Strategic Goal 

and Objective 

Proposed General Scope 

and Issues To Be Addressed 

T

Assessment of 

Public Water 

Supply Logic 

Model 

Goal 2, Objective 1 The proposed project is an assessment of the 

FY 2006 piloting of the Public Water System 

Supervision logic model as a tool for oversight, 

program assessment, and program management. 

Discussion will center on lessons learned, recommendations from pilot regions and states on 

possible changes to the oversight process, and 

ideas for new indicators or revisions to existing 

indicators. 

Based on the assessment, EPA also will consider 

which logic model indicators should be included 

in the next EPA Strategic Plan (2009-2014). 

FY 
Measuring 

Effectiveness of the 

Beaches 

Environmental 

Assessment and 

Coastal Health 

(BEACH) Act 

Grants 

Goal 2, Objective 2 EPA’s Office of Water administers the BEACH 

Act by making available almost $10 million in 

grants each year to 35 eligible coastal states/ 

territories to protect public heath at the nation’s 

beaches. States/territories use these grants to 

monitor water quality at their beaches and to 

notify the public when water quality problems 

exist. The ultimate goal is to protect millions of 

Americans from exposure to unhealthy levels of 

pathogens at coastal beaches by giving them the 

information to make informed choices on where 

to swim. 

The evaluation will assess the effectiveness of 

state and territory BEACH monitoring/notification programs by reviewing relevant beach 

monitoring and notification data and studies 

completed by the local beach authorities. EPA 

will also visit nine state officials who administer 

monitoring and public notification data to obtain 

their perspectives on the utility of monitoring 

and the effectiveness of their programs. 

FY 2008 

Review of State 

On-Site/ 

Decentralized 

Programs 

Goal 2, Objective 2 This review will look at the elements of state onsite/decentralized programs to evaluate whether 

they are adequate to protect public health and 

the environment. The elements to be reviewed 

include planning, performance, site evaluation, 

design, construction, operations and maintenance, compliance inspections and monitoring, 

residuals management, record keeping, inventory 

and reporting, public education, and 

funding/financial assistance. 

Data will be collected through document reviews 

and meetings with regional and state staff. 

FY 2008 

Program Evaluation 

of Tribal 106 Grant 

Guidance 

Goal 2, Objective 2 With the FY 2007 grant cycle, EPA’s Office of 

Water is beginning to use the new Tribal 106 

Grant Guidance to lead tribes in a more structured direction for managing their water quality 

protection programs. The new guidance guides 

tribes through various alternatives for designing 

their water quality programs and tiers of improvement. The guidance also lays the foundation for a 

new era of monitoring and collecting data on 

tribal waters. 

FY 2008 
168

meeting new tribal water quality requirements, 

such as development of tribal monitoring strategies, data collection, and submission to EPA. It 

will include a narrative assessment of tribal water 

quality, and will monitor EPA's ability to define, 

as per the guidance, a baseline for tracking and 

assessing the quality of waters in Indian country.

1 

Evaluation of the 

Clean Water Act 

Section 319 NonPoint Source 

Program 

Goal 2, Objective 2 The Clean Water Act establishes a “national policy” to develop and implement non-point source 

(NPS) programs expeditiously to achieve the 

goals of the Act. The Section 319 program 

addresses NPS pollution, which is the largest 

remaining cause of water quality impairments. 

Section 319 is the only program to address all 

sources of NPS pollution. Section 319 can be 

used for monitoring and watershed planning, for 

which U.S. Department of Agriculture funds cannot be used. 

Evaluation methodology will include analysis of 

project documents and monitoring results, site visits, and discussion sessions and interviews with state 

managers and staff and regional project officers. 

FY 

Measuring the 

Success of Water 

Quality Trading to 

Meet NPDES 

Permit Limits 

Goal 2, Objective 2 One of EPA’s key priorities is to foster innovative, 

market-based solutions to environmental problems. Trading pollutant credits among point and 

non-point sources is a flexible way to meet 

NPDES permit limits and obtain substantial cost 

savings. This evaluation will identify lessons 

learned from successful voluntary water quality 

trading programs; potential barriers to trading; 

and opportunities for improving Agency policies, 

guidance, and outreach/education efforts to foster 

water quality trading. The evaluation will collect 

information through interviews with federal 

employees, state NPDES permit writers, and local 

champions/developers of water quality trading 

programs. 

FY 

Program Evaluation 

of the Targeted 

Watersheds Grants 

(TWG) 

Goal 2, Objective 2 The TWG focus on identifying watersheds for 

which community-based collaborative partnerships are ready to implement watershed plans 

that, when funded, will lead to accelerated and 

measurable environmental results. 

FY 
quantifiable environmental results, including 

expanding grant recipients’ technical and organizational capacity. Evaluation methodology will 

include analysis of project documents and monitoring results, site visits, and discussions and 

interviews with selected grantees and their regional 

project officers 

GOAL 3 

Evaluation 

Topic 

Strategic Goal 

and Objective 

Proposed General Scope and Issues To 

Be Addressed 

Timeframe 

Measuring the 

Effectiveness of the 

CORE Emergency 

Response (ER) 

Program Review 

Process 

Goal 3, Objective 2 EPA’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM) 

CORE ER review process appears to have 

improved response preparedness in all the regions. 

The program has reached certain goals, expressed 

as CORE ER scores, that are taken to be a measure of each region’s preparedness. OEM will test 

whether reaching those goals makes a difference 

in the real response world. In addition, OEM 

needs to improve the CORE ER instrument 

(checklist) to address lessons learned from recent 

responses. This project will evaluate whether perceived improvement in preparedness is providing 

more efficient and effective response to real incidents. CORE ER involves all 10 EPA regions. 

FY 2007 

Superfund Program 

Reviews 

Goal 3, Objective 2 The Superfund program review is a 24-month 

process where each region will undergo a review 

on selected program elements. The review elements are selected based on their relative 

importance in meeting program targets such as 

construction completions, human exposures 

under control, contaminated groundwater under 

control, and deletions. This process involves conducting in-depth regional interviews and 

discussion sessions on the selected program elements, using carefully designed governing 

questions. 

Complete first 

Superfund program review 

cycle in second 

quarter of 

FY 2008. 

Initiate second 

Superfund program review 

cycle in third 

quarter 

FY 2008 and 

complete this 

cycle in 

FY 2010. 
170 

on Impacts and 

Effectiveness of the 

Collaborative 

Decision-Making 

Process at 

Superfund Sites 

Decision stage at Superfund sites and provides a 

better environmental result than the alternative 

process. Evaluation results will inform the collaborative decision-making process. 

Superfund 

Workload 

Assessment Project 

Goal 3, Objective 2 This project will develop a sound analytical basis 

for ensuring that human resources are used effectively and efficiently to achieve program goals. A 

Working Group, composed of representatives of 

all major EPA Superfund stakeholders, will use a 

bottom-up approach to determine work years 

required to implement and support the program. 

E

c

d

Re-evaluation of 

Site-Specific 

Payroll Charging 

Goal 3, Objective 2 This evaluation will focus on whether improvement has occurred based on the site-specific 

payroll benchmarking effort completed in second 

quarter of FY 2006. 

T

fo

p

w

p

se

te

Broaden Core 

Emergency 

Response (ER) 

Program and 

Evaluate Annually 

Goal 3, Objective 2 We will extend the Core ER program to include 

all aspects of emergency management activities 

(i.e., emergency response, emergency preparedness, and accident prevention.) We will use the 

baseline already developed under Core ER, to 

adapt and broaden the Core ER process, and then 

annually evaluate all aspects of the emergency 

management program. 

Im

c

b

ti

F

GOAL 4 

Evaluation 

Topic 

Strategic Goal 

and Objective 

Proposed General Scope and Issues To 

Be Addressed 

T

Evaluation of the 

National Estuary 

Program 

Goal 4, Objective 3 The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the 

progress the 28 estuaries have made in meeting 

their goals since the inception of the National 

Estuary Program in 1987. Effort will be made to 

characterize and assess best practices that can be 

transferred to other geographic-based programs. 

20
achieving program outcomes. 

EPA will use a retrospective data mine of its databases supplemented by information from sources 

such as interviews with regional staff and data 

from organizations such as the Association of 

State Wetland Managers and the Environmental 

Law Institute. Statistical analysis will answer some 

questions, while others will be best answered with 

descriptive narratives. 

evaluation 

and methodology to be 

conducted in 

2007. 

Evaluation to 

be conducted 

in 2008. 

GOAL 5 

Evaluation 

Topic 

Strategic Goal 

and Objective 

Proposed General Scope and Issues To 

Be Addressed 

Timeframe 

Evaluating EPA’s 

Petroleum Refinery 

National Priority 

Performance-Based 

Strategy 

Implementation 

Goal 5, Objective 1 As part of EPA’s strategic planning process, our 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance (OECA) develops a national program 

priority component that focuses attention on specific environmental problems and patterns of 

non-compliance. This evaluation will help identify components of a successful priority work 

process for addressing significant national environmental problems. OECA is currently midway 

in implementing 9 priority strategies under its 

FY 2005-2007 work planning cycle, and seeks to 

learn more about the specific aspects of the petroleum refinery process that worked well, and can 

be applied to other industry sectors and media 

programs and replicated at the regional and state 

levels. Knowledge gained from an effective exit 

strategy for the Petroleum Refinery process will 

help to inform the process for the nine current 

priorities and future efforts. Evaluation methodology includes interviews with EPA staff, partners, 

and stakeholders. In addition, the evaluation will 

require a review of strategy documents and supporting data. 

FY 2007 
172 

Framework compliance assurance for state air, water, and haz

ardous waste programs. The SRF was piloted in 10 

states in FY 2006. By the end of FY 2007, the 

remaining states and territories will be reviewed. 

The evaluation methodology will include surveys 

of state environmental agencies that were 

reviewed under the SRF and surveys of state 

media association members. 

th

tat

co

EPA New England 

Marina Initiative 

Goal 5, Objective 2 Under the EPA New England marina initiative, 

which ran from 2001 to 2005, a variety of marina 

environmental assistance projects were implemented and the results were measured. The 

primary goal of this effort was to help marinas 

meet required and desired practices managing 

stormwater, oil and fuel, and hazardous waste. 

Under the measurement component, environmental indicators were established and measured using 

statistically valid methods, including on-site 

assessment visits to monitor progress. The evaluation will determine the extent to which the 

program achieved its intended objectives. 

Evaluation methodology includes a review of the 

results of 140 on-site marina visits, as well as a review 

of regulatory records. 

FY 

Evaluation of the 

National 

Environmental 

Performance Track 

(NEPT) program 

Goal 5, Objective 2 This third party evaluation will review the effectiveness of the NEPT program in meeting its 

stated goals. The project will evaluate whether 

the program is likely to achieve the intended 

results, and will make appropriate recommendations on program design and implementation. 

FY 

In

tio

FY 

Co

ua

de

me

im

fin

NOTES 

1.	 Use of the terms “Indian country,” “Indian lands,” “tribal lands,” “tribal waters,” and “tribal areas” 

Strategic Plan is not intended to provide any legal guidance on the scope of any program being des

their use intended to expand or restrict the scope of any such programs. 
Summary of 

Consultation Efforts 
174 

and their ongoing participation is vital to 

achieving the goals and objectives we have 

set forth. 

EPA’s national and regional managers 

organized meetings, participated in conferences, and presented briefings to ensure that 

our partners and stakeholders fully understood our process for developing this Strategic 

Plan and had the opportunity to participate. We distributed our proposed strategic architecture–goals, objectives, sub-objectives, and 

associated strategic targets–and subsequently 

the full-text draft of the Strategic Plan to hundreds of our partners and stakeholders. We 

posted working papers, the draft Strategic Plan 

architecture, and the full-text draft of the 

Plan on EPA’s internet website, and we 

offered several options for individuals and 

groups to provide their comments. We carefully considered all the comments we 

received at each stage of the development 

process. 

This appendix summarizes major activities we conducted to consult with parties 

interested in or likely to be affected by EPA’s 

Strategic Plan. It briefly describes our consultation with the Congress and our state and 

tribal partners. It also includes a list of all 

organizations (for example, state, tribal, and 

industry associations) as well as federal agencies from which we solicited or received 

comments. EARLY CONSULTATION 

ON STATE AND 

TRIBAL ISSUES AND PRIORITIES 

Since states and tribes are major partners 

with EPA in environmental protection, we 

view and provided to our strategic 

for consideration. We also posted 

responses describing how the state 

issues and priorities raised were co

revising the Plan. RELEASE OF DRAFT 

ARCHITEC

FULL-TEXT DRAFT 

EPA considered all comments 

from our state and tribal partners o

strategic architecture, which we se

than 800 organizations for review 

ment in mid-February 2006. We so

comments on the draft architectur

Members of Congress; states and s

zations; all federally recognized trib

organizations; local government re

tives; other federal agencies; memb

environmental, academic, and pub

groups; and representatives of the 

community through March 2006. We took into account all the c

we received on the draft architectu

developed a full-text draft of the S

Plan. We provided this full-text dr

more than 800 recipients noted ab

solicited their comments through 

2006. 

Reviewers were offered multip

tives for submitting comments on 

architecture and full text draft—el

ly, via EPA’s internet website; by m

telephone. We designed a database 

comments, which were immediate

ed to appropriate staff and manage

consideration. 
(COS), te atoaassocatoostate ad 

territorial environmental commissioners, participating in several national meetings 

sponsored by ECOS and ensuring that ECOS 

members were well informed about the 

Strategic Plan revision process and the opportunities for engagement. ECOS assisted us 

during the development of this Strategic Plan 

by providing information and materials for 

review to individual state agencies and by 

coordinating responses from ECOS members 

on the full-text draft. In addition, Agency 

goal teams were encouraged to work with the 

appropriate ECOS media committees 

throughout the revision process. 

CONSULTING WITH TRIBAL PARTNERS 

In June 2005, EPA staff participated in 

the National Tribal Conference on 

Environmental Management to discuss the 

revision of EPA’s Strategic Plan. This meeting 

brought together tribal leaders and senior 

tribal environmental managers from across 

the country and provided a forum for soliciting tribal perspectives on the most important 

environmental challenges in the years ahead. 

We continued to consult with tribes at 

the national and regional levels throughout 

the development of the Strategic Plan. EPA 

CONSULTING WITH THE CONGRESS 

In February 2006, we provided the 

Chairmen and Ranking Minority Members of 

EPA’s authorizing and appropriations committees, their staffs, and other interested 

Members with copies of our draft strategic 

architecture. We provided the full-text draft 

of EPA’s Strategic Plan to Members and 

Congressional staff in early June. 

Congressional contacts were encouraged to 

submit comments on these documents electronically, via the database link to EPA’s 

internet site, by telephone, or by mail. 

On April 11, 2006, EPA met (hosted by 

staff of the Senate Environment and Public 

Works Committee) with interested Senate 

staff to discuss the requirements of the 

Government Performance and Results Act, 

EPA’s strategic planning process, our draft 

strategic architecture, and plans for next 

steps in developing the full-text draft of the 

Strategic Plan. This consultation session was 

followed by a briefing on May 10, 2006 for 

additional staff members of the Senate 

Environment and Public Works Committee. 

A briefing on the full-text draft for staff of 

the Committee was held on June 23, 2006. 
176 

Alaska Intertribal Council 

Alternatives for Community and 

Environment 

American Association for the Advancement 

of Science 

American Chemical Society Task Force on 

Environmental Health and Safety 

American Chemistry Council 

American Farmland Trust 

American Forest and Paper Association 

American Forests 

American Indian Science and Engineering 

Society 

American Industrial Health Council 

American Lung Association 

American Petroleum Institute 

American Public Health Association 

American Rivers 

American Society of Civil Engineers 

American Water Works Association 

ARI Technologies 

Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality 

Aroostook Band of Micmacs 

Association of American Pesticide Control 

Officials 

Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies 

Association of State Drinking Water 

Administrators 

Association of State and Interstate Water 

Pollution Control Administrators 

Association of State and Territorial Health 

Officials 

Association of State and Territorial Solid 

Waste Management Officials 

Association of State Drinking Water 

Administrators 

Association of State Wetland Managers 

Bowdoin College 

Services 

California Indian Basketweavers A

Center for Biological Diversity 

Center for International Environm

Center for Regulatory Effectivenes

Central States Air Resources Agen

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe 

Children’s Defense Fund 

Chippewa Ottawa Resource Autho

Clean Water Action 

Clean Water Network 

Coalition for Effective Environme

Information 

Coalition for Environmentally Res

Economics 

Columbia River Intertribal Fish C

Concurrent Technologies Corpora

Confederated Tribes of Siletz India

Confederated Tribes of the Umatil

Reservation 

Conservation Fund 

Construction Materials Recycling 

Association 

Corporate Environmental Enforce

Council 

Council of Energy Resource Tribes 

Council for Excellence in Govern

Council of State Governments 

CropLife America 

Defenders of Wildlife 

Duke University 

EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund 

Eco-Cycle 

Ecological Society of America 

Electric Power Research Institute 

Environmental Council of the Sta

Environmental Defense 

Environmental Health Coalition 

Environmental Law Institute 
Humane Society of the United States 

Idaho Department of Environmental Quality 

Indigenous Environmental Network 

Indigenous Waters Initiative 

Institute for Tribal Environmental 

Professionals 

Intertribal Advisory Committee of the Nez 

Perce Tribe 

Intertribal Agriculture Council 

Intertribal Bison Cooperative 

Intertribal Council of Arizona 

Intertribal Council of Michigan 

Intertribal Environmental Council of 

Oklahoma 

Intertribal Timber Council 

International City/County Management 

Association 

Iowa Department of Natural Resources 

Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment 

Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior 

Chippewa Indians 

Local Government Advisory Committee 

Louisiana Department of Environmental 

Quality 

Maine Board of Pesticide Control 

Mercatus Center 

Midwest Alliance of Sovereign Tribes 

Midwest Tribal Aquaculture Network 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

Missouri Department of Agriculture, Bureau 

of Pesticide Control 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition 

Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality 

Montana Department of Natural Resources 

Morgan, Lewis and Bockius 

National Association of State Universities 

and Land Grant Colleges 

National Audubon Society 

National Congress of American Indians 

National Council for Science and the 

Environment 

National Environmental Trust 

National Federation of Independent Business 

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 

National Fisheries Institute 

National Indian Health Board 

National Mining Association 

National Parks Conservation Association 

National Pesticide Management Association 

National Pollution Prevention Roundtable 

National Research Council 

National Tribal Air Association 

National Tribal Caucus 

National Tribal Environmental Council 

National Wildlife Federation 

Native American Fish and Wildlife Society 

Native American Rights Fund 

Native American Water Association 

Native Ecology Initiative, Incorporated 

Natural Resources Defense Council 

Navajo Nation 

Nevada Division of Environmental 

Protection 

New England Interstate Water Pollution 

Control Commission 

New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection 

New Mexico Environmental Department, 

Surface Water Quality Bureau 

New York State Department of Health 

North Carolina Department of Environment, 

Health, and Natural Resources 

Northwest Indian Applied Research Institute 
178

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals 

Pesticide Policy Coalition 

PPG Industries, Incorporated 

Prescott Land and Livestock 

Princeton University 

RAND Public Policy Research 

React For Environmental Justice 

Resources for the Future 

River Network 

Rocky Mountain Institute 

San Francisco Department of the 

Environment 

Solid Waste Association of North America 

Southern Organizing Committee for 

Economic and Social Justice 

State and Territorial Air Pollution Program 

Administrators and Association of Local 

Air Pollution Control Officials 

Tribal Science Council Tribal Solid Waste Advisory Network 

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Environment, 

Energy and Technology Affairs 

U.S. Composting Council 

U.S. Public Interest Research Group 

Union of Concerned Scientists 

United South and Eastern Tribes, 

Incorporated 

University of Minnesota, Department of Soil, Waste, and Climate 

Utah Department of Environmental Quality Vermont Department of Environmental 

Conservation 

Vermont Water Supply Division Virginia Department of Environmental 

Quality 

Yukon River Intertribal Watershed 

Federal Agencies 

Army Corps of Engineers 

Consumer Product Safety Commis

Department of Agriculture 

Department of Commerce 

Department of Defense 

Department of Education 

Department of Energy 

Department of Health and Human 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development 

Department of the Interior 

Department of Justice 

Department of Labor 

Department of State 

Department of Transportation 

Department of Treasury 

Federal Emergency Management A

Federal Energy Regulatory Commi

General Services Administration 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration 

National Oceanic and Atmospher

Administration 

National Science Foundation 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Office of Management and Budget 

Small Business Administration Tennessee Valley Authority 

U.S. Agency for International Dev

U.S. Geological Survey 

U.S. Trade Representative 
Areas of Coordination Between

EPA and Other Federal Agenci
180 

Climate 

Change 

Safe Water 

tion and 

Restoration 

ties and 

Ecosystem

Agriculture ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Army Corps of Engineers ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Commerce ✖ ✖ 

Consumer Product Safety Commission ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Defense ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Education ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Energy ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Federal Emergency Management Agency ✖ ✖ ✖ 

General Services Administration ✖ 

Health and Human Services ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Homeland Security ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Housing and Urban Development ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Interior ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Justice ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Labor ✖ ✖ 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

National Science Foundation ✖ 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission ✖ ✖ 

Small Business Administration ✖ ✖ ✖ 

State ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Transportation ✖ ✖ ✖ ✖ 

Treasury ✖ 

Tennessee Valley Authority ✖ ✖ 

U.S. Agency for International Development ✖ ✖ ✖ 

U.S. Trade Representative ✖ 
Land Preservation and Restoration


Preserve and restore the land by using innovative waste management practices and cleaning up 

contaminated properties to reduce risks posed by releases of harmful substances. 

Healthy Communities and Ecosystems


Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities, and ecosystems using 

integrated and comprehensive approaches and partnerships. 

Compliance and Environmental Stewardship


Protect human health and the environment through ensuring compliance with environmental


requirements by enforcing environmental statutes, preventing pollution, and promoting 


environmental stewardship. Encourage innovation and provide incentives for governments, business

and the public that promote environmental stewardship and long-term sustainable outcomes.

2 Recycled/Recyclable—Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper