FY 2012 

EPA Budget in Brief 

United States Environmental Protection Agency
 

www.epa.gov
 
 

 

 

 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of the Chief Financial Officer (2710A) 

Publication Number: EPA-190-S-11-001 

February 2011 

www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable—Printed on 100% postconsumer recycled paper. 
R:\Planning\2012\President's_Budget\BiB\05_v3_Table_of_Contents.docxR:\Planning\2012\President's

_Budget\BiB\05_v3_Table_of_Contents.docx 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Budget in Brief 

Table of Contents 

PAGE 

Overview ..................................................................................................................1
 

Summary Resource Charts 

EPA’s FY 2012 Budget by Goal............................................................................9
 

EPA’s FY 2012 by Appropriation.........................................................................10
 

EPA’s Resource History......................................................................................11
 

EPA’s Resources by Major Category..................................................................12
 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes ...................................................................13
 

Goals 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality .................19
 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters ..................................................................29
 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development ...41
 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution...................55
 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws ...............................................................63
 

Appendices 

Summary Resource Tables
 

EPA’s Resources by Appropriation..................................................................75
 

EPA’s Program/Projects by Program Area.......................................................77
 

Highlighted Programs
 

EPA Research and Development ....................................................................91
 

Categorical Grants ...........................................................................................95
 

STAG (State and Tribal Assistance Grants).....................................................97
 

Estimated SRF Obligations by State (FY 2010 – FY 2012)............................105
 

Infrastructure Financing .................................................................................109
 

Trust Funds (Superfund, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks) ...................115
 

List of Acronyms ...............................................................................................119
 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

Mission 

The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

is to protect human health and the environment. 

Budget in Brief Overview 

This Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Budget request reflects the tough choices needed for our 

nation’s short- and long-term fiscal health. The President directed EPA and other 

federal agencies to reduce funding levels out of an understanding that the same 

sacrifices are being made by American families every day. While this budget includes 

significant cuts, it is designed to ensure that EPA can effectively carry out its core 

mission to protect public health and our environment, including reductions of air and 

water pollution, ensuring the safety of chemicals, providing for the strong enforcement 

of environmental standards, as well as the cleanup of contaminated sites that 

Americans expect. It also reflects EPA’s overarching commitment to science and our 

focus on the concerns of underserved communities and at-risk populations. 

As it does every year, EPA has worked to find efficiencies within our programs while 

protecting the most vulnerable in our communities, maintaining hard-won momentum in 

improving compliance, revitalizing key ecosystems and following the science that will 

help the Agency sustain progress and foster innovation. FY 2010’s Budget of $10.3 

billion was EPA’s highest funding level since its creation; the FY 2012 Budget request 

stands at $8.973 billion. For FY 2012, funding is maintained for EPA’s core priorities, 

such as enforcement of the environment and public health protections. 

While this budget includes significant cuts, such as a combined $947 million reduction 

to EPA’s Clean Water and Drinking Water Revolving Funds (SRFs), as with any smart 

budget, EPA plans to make targeted investments to ensure its effectiveness and 

efficiency in protecting our health and environment. The FY 2012 Budget maintains 

funding to update the Clean Air Act’s standards and our efforts to assist in transitioning 

America to a clean energy economy. It continues the critical work necessary for 

protecting and restoring America’s waters. This budget seeks to sustain progress in 

assuring the safety of chemicals in our products, our environment and our bodies 

through strategic investments and new approaches. It reflects a commitment to close 

loopholes for big polluters, better ensuring that our federal laws are enforced effectively 

and leverages new technologies to improve data processes, reducing the burden on 

states, tribes, affected industry and the Agency. It also focuses on community-level 

engagement to reach a broader range of citizens. Finally, it continues to reflect our core 

1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

values of science and transparency in addressing America’s complex environmental 

protection challenges. 

Although these difficult choices may unfortunately slow the pace of progress toward 

performance measures established in our FY 2011–2015 Strategic Plan, the FY 2012 

budget maintains the fundamental mission of the Agency: to protect the health of the 

American people and our environment. 

Below are the FY 2012 funding points of focus: 

Improving Air Quality and Supporting Action on Greenhouse Gas Pollution 

EPA will continue to protect American families’ health by enforcing the Clean Air Act’s 

updated air pollution standards that rein in big polluters by cutting back on mercury, 

carbon dioxide, arsenic and other life-threatening pollution in the air we breathe. EPA 

will take measured, common-sense steps to address greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution 

and improve air quality. Taking these reasonable steps to update standards now will 

allow the Agency to better protect people’s health, drive technology innovation for a 

stronger economy, and protect the environment cost-effectively. In fact, creating more 

sustainable materials and products is an opportunity for American innovators, investors, 

and entrepreneurs. 

EPA is requesting $5.1 million in additional resources for Air Toxics and $6.2 million in 

upgrades to the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory (NVFEL). Additional 

resources for air toxics will be used to improve EPA’s air toxic monitoring capabilities 

and to improve dissemination of information between and among the various EPA 

offices, the state, local and tribal governments, and the public. Additional resources for 

the NVFEL will begin to address the anticipated more than four-fold increase in the 

number of vehicle and engine certificates EPA issues and the much more challenging 

oversight requirements for both the vehicle/engine compliance program and fuels 

programs due to the diversity of sophisticated technologies. 

EPA’s FY 2012 budget requests $46 million for efforts aimed to reduce GHG pollution 

and address the Climate and Clean Energy Challenge. This includes the $25 million 

described below for state grants focused on developing the technical capacity for 

addressing GHG pollution in their Clean Air Act permitting activities and an additional $5 

million for related EPA efforts. $6 million in additional funding is included for the 

implementation of new emission standards that will reduce GHG pollution from 

passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium duty passenger vehicles. These funds 

also will support EPA’s assessment and potential development, in response to legal 

obligations, of standards for other mobile sources. Also included is $7 million for the 

2
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

assessment and potential development of New Source Performance Standards for 

several categories of major stationary sources through means that are flexible and 

manageable for business. Finally, this amount includes $2.5 million for priority 

measurement, reporting and verification activities related to implementing the 

Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule, to ensure the collection of high quality data. 

Protecting America’s Water 

Many of America’s waterbodies are imperiled from a variety of stressors, and EPA will 

work to confront the challenges from multiple angles – local and national, traditional and 

innovative. In FY 2012, EPA will concentrate on a few targeted waterbodies. As part of 

the Administration’s long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water 

Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with States and communities to enhance 

technical, managerial and financial capacity. Important to the technical capacity will be 

enhancing alternatives analysis to expand “green infrastructure” options and their 

multiple benefits. Future year budgets for the SRFs gradually adjust, taking into 

account repayments, through 2016 with the goal of providing, on average, about 5 

percent of water infrastructure spending annually. When coupled with increasing 

repayments from loans made in past years by states, the annual funding will allow the 

SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water and drinking water 

infrastructure. Federal dollars provided through the SRFs will act as a catalyst for 

efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable water 

infrastructure. Overall, the Administration requests a combined $2.5 billion for the SRFs. 

This request brings the four year total for SRFs to nearly $17 billion (FY 2009 – FY 

2012). 

EPA is increasing resources to address upstream pollution resources in the Mississippi 

River Basin. The Mississippi River Basin Program is funded at $6.0 million and will 

focus on nonpoint source program enhancements to spur water-quality improvement. 

This is supported by $600,000 for enforcement activities in the Basin. Resources for 

the Chesapeake Bay Program are increased by $17.4 million to $67.4 million to support 

our work under the President's Executive Order on the Chesapeake Bay, for 

implementing a strategy to restore Bay water quality. While funding has gone down 

from 2010 levels, EPA will also continue to lead the implementation of the Great Lakes 

Restoration Initiative, providing $350 million for programs and projects strategically 

chosen to target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes 

ecosystem. Continuing efforts in these and other clean water and drinking water 

projects reflects a commitment to leverage Federal agency partnerships to strengthen 

disadvantaged communities by reconnecting them with their waters and achieving 

community-based goals. 

3
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

Building Strong State and Tribal Partnerships 

The mission of EPA is achieved through strong collaboration with states and tribes and 

reflects the Agency’s overarching commitment to address the legitimate concerns of 

underserved communities and at-risk populations. This budget includes $1.2 billion for 

State and Tribal categorical grants, an increase of $85 million, to support States and 

Tribes to implement their environmental programs. Our partners are working diligently 

to implement updated standards under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Water Act 

(CWA) and need additional support during this time of constrained state budgets. 

The $306 million in State grant funding for air programs is above historical levels and 

necessary to meet the additional responsibilities associated with achieving air quality 

standards that better protect people’s health and the environment. Increases for air 

grants include $25 million for development and deployment of technical capacity 

needed to address GHG pollution in permitting under the CAA and $54 million to 

support increased state workload for implementation of updated National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards. 

An additional $21 million is requested for Water Pollution Control (Sec 106) grants. This 

increase addresses issues that continue to degrade water quality issues nationwide by 

supporting states as they focus on the continued development of water quality 

standards, identification of impaired waters, development of Total Maximum Daily Loads 

for use in permit actions, and targeted enforcement to address the most serious 

instances of noncompliance. An additional $4 million is requested for Public Water 

Systems Supervision (PWSS) grants to support management of state and drinking 

water system data. This will improve transparency and efficiency as it will replace the 

outdated Safe Drinking Water Information System/State Version (SDWIS/State) and 

improve reporting and dissemination of drinking water system compliance information. 

$20 million is requested for the Tribal Multimedia Implementation grant program in order 

to help tribes move beyond building the capacity to plan, develop, and establish 

environmental protection programs under the GAP program to implementation. This is 

intended to advance negotiated environmental plans and activities on a cooperative 

basis between tribes and EPA, ensuring that tribal environmental priorities are 

adequately addressed. 

Strengthening Enforcement and Compliance 

The FY 2012 President’s Budget includes approximately $621 million for EPA’s 

enforcement and compliance assurance program. EPA enforcement programs face 

complex challenges that demand both traditional and innovative strategies to improve 

our effectiveness and efficiency in protecting the health of American families. Through 

4
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

the Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas initiative, EPA will begin 

to harness the tools of modern technology to address some of these challenges and 

make EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance program more efficient and 

effective. EPA will start using 21st century electronic reporting (e-reporting), monitoring 

tools, and market-based approaches to ensure a level playing field for American 

businesses. 

Maximizing the use of advanced data and monitoring tools will allow EPA to focus its 

limited inspection and enforcement resources in those areas where they are most 

effective or most necessary. These include complex industrial operations that require 

physical inspection, cases involving potentially significant harm to human health or the 

environment, potential criminal violations or repeat violators. In FY 2012, EPA will begin 

to review existing compliance reporting requirements to identify opportunities to use 

objective self-monitoring, self or third party certification, public accountability, advanced 

monitoring techniques, and electronic reporting requirements. 

EPA has focused on identifying where the most significant vulnerabilities exist, in terms 

of scale and potential risk and proposes to increase oversight/monitoring of regulated 

high risk facilities in order to better implement prevention approaches. In FY 2012, as 

part of the Regaining Ground initiative, EPA will invest an additional $5 million to 

increase the number of inspections at high risk facilities like oil facilities regulated under 

the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) and the Facility Response 

Plan (FRP) regulations. Funding will also be used to develop and implement a third 

party audit program for non-high risk SPCC facilities, in order to improve the efficiency 

of targeting resources and inspectors at these facilities in the future. 

Enhancing Chemical Safety 

America’s citizens deserve to know the products they use are safe. To sustain progress 

in assuring the safety of chemicals in our products, our environment and our bodies, 

EPA is improving how it assesses the safety of chemicals in the environment and the 

marketplace. FY 2012 represents a crucial stage in EPA’s approach for enhancing 

chemical safety. The program has attained its ‘zero tolerance’ goal in preventing 

introduction of unsafe new chemicals into commerce but many ‘pre-TSCA’ chemicals 

already in commerce remain un-assessed. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue with the transformation of its approach for ensuring 

chemical safety. EPA’s approach will be centered on increasing the pace in assessing 

chemicals, strengthening information management, taking immediate and lasting 

actions to eliminate or reduce identified chemical risks, and developing proven safer 

alternatives. 

5
 

 

 

 

Overview 

This budget request includes a $16 million investment to more fully implement the 

Administrator’s Enhancing Chemical Safety initiative by taking action to reduce chemical 

risks, increase the pace of chemical hazard assessments, and provide the public with 

greater access to toxic chemical information. Funding will support implementation of 

chemical risk reduction actions that consider the impact of chemicals on children’s 

health and on disadvantaged, low income, and indigenous populations. The additional 

funding will help to close knowledge and risk management gaps for thousands of 

chemicals already in commerce by updating regulatory controls and other actions that 

decrease potential impacts to human health and the environment. EPA also will 

continue promoting use of safer chemicals, chemical management practices and 

technologies to enable the transition away from existing chemicals that present 

unreasonable human health and environmental risks. 

Supporting Healthy Communities 

The Environmental Protection Agency, along with other federal agencies, is committed 

to protect, sustain or restore the health of communities and ecosystems by bringing 

together a variety of programs, tools, approaches and resources directed to the local 

level. A diversity of perspectives and experiences brings a wider range of ideas and 

approaches and creates opportunities for innovation. Results are drawn from both 

regulatory mechanisms and collaborative partnerships with stakeholders. Partnerships 

with international, Federal, state, tribal, and local governments and non-governmental 

organizations have long been a common thread across EPA’s programs. 

The FY 2012 budget includes a $19.8 million multidisciplinary initiative for Healthy 

Communities. It supports states and communities in promoting healthier school 

environments by increasing technical support, outreach and co-leading Federal 

interagency coordination and integration efforts. It also provides resources to address 

air toxics within at-risk communities and to support the important joint DOT/HUD/EPA 

outreach and technical assistance efforts to encourage and facilitate sustainable 

development within communities. 

EPA supports the America’s Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative to develop a communitybased 21st century conservation agenda that can also spur job creation in the tourism 

and recreation industries. EPA will join the Department of the Interior, the Department 

of Agriculture, and the Council on Environmental Quality to lead the coordinated effort to 

leverage support across the Federal Government to help community-driven efforts to 

protect and restore our outdoor legacy. The area-wide planning and community support 

focus of existing EPA programs and initiatives like Urban Waters and Brownfields 

programs align well with the goals and objectives of this new initiative. 

6
 

 

 

 

Overview 

Maintaining a Strong Science Foundation 

In FY 2012, EPA is restructuring our scientific research program to be more integrated 

and cross-disciplinary, allowing our scientific work to be more transformational. EPA is 

strengthening its planning and delivery of science to more deeply examine our 

environmental and public health challenges and inform sustainable solutions to meet 

our strategic goals. By looking at problems from a systems perspective, this new 

research approach will create synergy and produce more timely and comprehensive 

results beyond those possible from approaches that are more narrowly targeted to 

single chemicals or problem areas. In FY 2012, we are requesting a science and 

technology budget of $826 million. This amount includes increases to research on 

endocrine disrupting chemicals, green chemistry, e-waste and e-design, green 

infrastructure, computational toxicology, air monitoring, drinking water and Science, 

Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM) Fellowships. 

Science is – and must continue to be – the foundation of all our work at EPA. Good 

science leads to shared solutions; everyone benefits from clean air and clean water. 

Rigorous science leads to innovative solutions to complex environmental challenges. 

Most of the scientific research increases will support additional Science to Achieve 

Results (STAR) grants and fellowships to make progress on these research priorities 

and leverage the expertise of the academic research community. This budget also 

supports the study of computational toxicology and other priority research efforts with a 

focus on advancing the design of sustainable solutions for reducing risks associated 

with environmentally hazardous substances. Two million dollars is also included to 

conduct a long-term review of EPA’s laboratory network. 

7
8
 

 

$1,22

9

 

Overview 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

FY 2012 Budget by Goal 

Total Agency: $8,973 Million 

Goal 1 Goal 5 12.5% 9.2% 

Goal 4 

7.8% 

Goal 2 

Goal 3 

22.4% 

$1,131 M 

$4,343 M $2,017 M 

$703 M 

$830 M 

48.1%
 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Our Communities 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

Note: Dollar totals and percentages in chart exclude a $50 million cancellation of prior 

year funds. Totals may not add due to rounding. 

9
 

 

Overview 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

FY 2012 Budget by Appropriation 

Total Agency: $8,973 Million 

S&T 

9.1% 

LUST
 

$112 M
 

1.2%
 

13.7% 

Oil IG

B&F $46 M $24 M 

$42 M 0.5% 

SF 

EPM 

31.9% 

STAG 

42.8% 

$3,860 M $826 M 

$1,236 M 

$2,877 M 

0.3% 

0.5% 

Science & Technology Environmental Programs & Management 

Inspector General Buildings & Facilities 

Inland Oil Spill Superfund 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks State & Tribal Assistance Grants 

Note: Dollar totals and percentages in chart exclude a $50 million cancellation of prior 

year funds. Totals may not add due to rounding. 

10
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overview 

EPA’s Enacted Budget FY 2000 to 2012 

$9.0 

$10.3 

$7.6 $7.8 $8.1 $8.1 $8.4 

$8.0 

$7.6 $7.7 $7.5 $7.6 

$10.3 

$0.0 

$2.0 

$4.0 

$6.0 

$8.0 

$10.0 

$12.0 

Dollars in Billions 

President's Budget Annualized CR Enacted Budgets 

(Dollars in Billions) 

FY 2012 President’s Budget 

FY 2011 Annualized CR 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

Fiscal Year 

Notes: FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding 

supplemental appropriations.
 

FY 2002 Enacted includes $175.6 M provided for Homeland Security in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act.
 

FY 2006 Enacted excludes hurricane supplemental funding.
 

All Enacted Budgets and Annualized CR include rescissions; President’s Budget includes cancellation of prior year funds.
 

EPA’s FTE* Ceiling History 

18,100 

18,000 

17,832 17,802 

17,909 

17,759 

17,631 17,560 

17,324 

17,252 

17,417 17,417 

17,202 

15,000 

15,500 

16,000 

16,500 

17,000 

17,500 

18,000 

18,500 

FTE 

FY 2012 President’s Budget 

FY 2011 Annualized CR 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

Fiscal Year 

* FTE (Full Time Equivalent) = one employee working full time for a full year (52 weeks X 40 hours = 2,080 hours), or the equivalent number of 

hours worked by several part-time or temporary employees. 

Notes: FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental 

appropriations. 

FY 2012 President's Budget FTE level reflects a realignment of total FTEs to better reflect utilization rates and excludes projected 69 

reimbursable FTE for Pesticides Registration Fund which do not count against FTE ceiling. 

11
 

Overview 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Resources by Major Category

(Dollars in Billions) 

Categorical Grants

Operating Budget 

Trust Funds 

Infrastructure Financing 

$12.0

$10.0

$8.0

$6.0

$4.0

$2.0

$0.0

$2.7 $2.7 $2.4 $2.1 $2.1 $1.9 $1.9 

$3.9 $3.9 

$2.7 

$1.3 $1.3 $1.3 $1.3 $1.3 $1.4 $1.4 

$1.4 $1.4 

$1.3 

$2.9 $3.2 $3.1 $3.2 $3.2 $3.2 $3.3 

$3.9 $3.9 

$3.8 

$1.1 $1.2 $1.1 $1.1 $1.1 $1.1 $1.1 

$1.1 $1.1 

$8.1 $7.5 $7.6 $1.2 $8.4 $8.0 $7.6 $7.7 

$10.3 $10.3 

$9.0 

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
 

EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN CR PB
 

Notes: 

Totals may not add due to rounding 

The Operating Budget includes funding provided for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. 

FY 2005 Enacted reflects 0.8% Rescission 

FY 2006 Enacted reflects 0.476% rescission plus 1% additional rescission and $80 M rescission to prior year funds. 

 Excludes Hurricane Supplemental funding. 

FY 2008 Enacted includes a 1.56% rescission and $5 M rescission to prior year funds 

FY 2009 Enacted reflects a $10 M rescission to prior year funds 

FY 2010 Enacted reflects a $40 M rescission to prior year funds 

FY 2011 CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental 

appropriations. This total reflects a $40 M rescission to prior year funds 

FY 2012 President’s Budget reflects a $50 M cancellation of prior year funds 

12
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

Climate Change and Air Quality 

CAA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Permitting

(FY 2012 PB: $30.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0M, FY 2012 Change: +$30.0M)
 

•	 Supports states in developing and deploying the technical capacity needed to address greenhouse 

gas emissions in permitting large sources as part of their Clean Air Act programs. 

GHG New Source Performance Standards
 (FY 2012 PB: $7.6M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$7.6M)
 

•	 In response to legal obligations regarding NSPS, funding will support the assessment, and potential 

development, of greenhouse gas limits for several categories of major stationary sources of 

greenhouse gases through means that are flexible and manageable for businesses. 

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reporting Rule

(FY 2012 PB: $19.2M, FY 2010 Enacted: $16.7M, FY 2012 Change: +$2.5M) 

•	 Increase to support implementation of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. 

GHG Standards for Transportation Sources

(FY 2012 PB: $6.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$6.0M)
 

•	 $2.0 million increase to support the implementation of GHG standards for passenger cars, light-duty 

trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles. 

•	 $4.0 million increase to support the analysis and potential development and subsequent 

implementation of GHG standards for heavy-duty trucks and for initial analysis in support of other 

mobile-source categories such as locomotives, marine, and aircraft engines, in order to respond to 

rulemaking petitions. 

Carbon Capture and Sequestration

(FY 2012 PB: $10.1M, FY 2010 Enacted: $7.9M, FY 2012 Change: +$2.2M) 

•	 Increase to address several critical air and climate-related issues and assist State in implementing 

new federal requirements for underground injection of carbon dioxide. 

Air Toxics Initiative
 (FY 2012 PB: $26.6M, FY 2010 Enacted: $21.5M, FY 2012 Change: +$5.1M)
 

•	 Requested increase of $3.7 million will be targeted at improvements in monitoring capabilities on 

source-specific and ambient bases. These funds will also improve the dissemination of information 

between and among the various EPA offices, the state, local and tribal governments, and the public. 

•	 An additional $1.4 million will support the development of regulations that are needed to meet courtordered deadlines, including MACT standards that have been found deficient by the courts. 

Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) Grants

(FY 2012 PB: $0.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $60.0M, FY 2012 Change: -$60.0M)
 

•	 This reduction reflects the elimination of DERA grant funding for FY 2012. 

•	 Grants focus on emission reductions from existing diesel engines through engine retrofits, rebuilds 

and replacements; switching to cleaner fuels; idling reduction strategies; and other clean diesel 

strategies. 

13
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

America’s Waters 

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)

(FY 2012 PB: $350.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $475.0M, FY 2012 Change: -$125.0M)
 

•	 Programs and projects will be strategically chosen to target the most significant environmental 

problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem, a $125 million decrease from FY 2010, the first year of the 

initiative. 

•	 The initiative will implement the most important projects for Great Lakes Restoration and achieve 

visible results. FY 2012 activities will emphasize implementation and include grants to implement the 

Initiative by funding states, tribes and other partners. 

Chesapeake Bay Program

(FY 2012 PB: $67.4M FY 2010 Enacted: $50.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$17.4M)
 

•	 Increase for implementation of the President’s Executive Order on Chesapeake Bay Protection and 

Restoration. 

•	 Funding will support Bay watershed States as they implement their plans to reduce nutrient and 

sediment pollution in an unprecedented effort to restore this economically important ecosystem. 

Mississippi River Basin

(FY 2010 PB: $6.6M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$6.6M)
 

•	 Through a competitive grant process with States, the Mississippi River Basin program will address 

excessive nutrient loadings that contribute to water quality impairments in the basin and, ultimately, to 

hypoxic conditions (dead zones) in the Gulf of Mexico. 

•	 Working with the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force, EPA will help target efforts within critical watersheds to 

implement effective strategies that can yield significant progress in addressing nonpoint source 

nutrient pollution. 

•	 A key emphasis will be coordinating with USDA and USGS to promote sustainable agricultural 

practices, to reduce nutrient loadings in the Mississippi River Basin and to implement monitoring 

programs to measure nutrient reductions. 

•	 Included within this total is $0.6M for enforcement actions in the Basin. 

Water Infrastructure 

State Revolving Funds (SRFs)

(FY 2012 PB: $2,540.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $3,487.0M, FY 2012 Change: -$947.0M)
 

•	 The FY 2012 Budget request of $2,540 million reflects $1,550 million for the Clean Water SRF and 

$990 million for the Drinking Water SRF. 

•	 As part of the Administration’s long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable Water 

Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with states and communities to enhance technical, 

managerial and financial capacity. 

•	 Future year budgets for SRF Budget gradually adjust, taking into account repayments, through 2016 

with the goal of providing, on average, about 5 percent of water infrastructure spending annually. 

•	 When coupled with increasing repayments from loans made in past years by states, the annual 

funding will allow the SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water and drinking water 

infrastructure, respectively. 

14
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

State and Tribal Partnerships 

State and Local Air Quality Management Grants

(FY 2012 PB: $305.5M, FY 2010 Enacted: $226.6M, FY 2012 Change: +$78.9M)
 

•	 Increase of $37.4 million to support expanded core state workload for implementing additional 

NAAQS and reducing public exposure to air toxics. This will support state workload when 

implementing updated NAAQS resulting from EPA’s commitment to review each NAAQS according to 

the CAA deadlines. 

•	 $15.0 million specifically for additional state air monitors required by new or revised NAAQS. States 

previously could use grant funding to procure monitors, but this is the first time funding will be 

specifically for monitors. 

•	 Includes $25.0 million state grant increase to support state efforts to develop and deploy the technical 

capacity needed to address greenhouse gas emissions in permitting large sources under the Clean 

Air Act. 

•	 $1.5 million will support the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to be used by states to facilitate the 

collection, review and use of greenhouse gas emissions data. 

Water Pollution Control Grants (Sect. 106)

(FY 2012 PB: $250.3M, FY 2010 Enacted: $229.3M, FY 2012 Change: +$21.0M)
 

•	 Increase to strengthen the base state, interstate and Tribal programs. 

•	 Increase reflects recognition of the growing workload for State Water programs to address postconstruction runoff and other new or anticipated regulatory requirements and address emerging water 

quality issues such as nutrient pollution. 

Multi-Media Tribal Implementation Grants

(FY 2012 PB: $20.0M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$20.0M)
 

•	 Funds a new grant program that will allow the Agency to provide multi-media grants to tribes to 

augment capacity building efforts and begin implementing Federal environmental protection 

programs. 

•	 Tribes will be able to develop and implement programs consistent with EPA statutory authorities such 

as CAA 105, CWA 106, RCRA and other tribal priorities. This may include tribal activities such as 

monitoring, permitting, and other implementation responsibilities. 

Tribal General Assistance Grants 

(FY 2012 PB: $71.4M, FY 2010 Enacted: $62.9M, FY 2012 Change: +$8.5M)
 

•	 Increase will provide tribes with a stronger foundation to build tribal environmental protection capacity. 

•	 Furthers EPA’s partnership and collaboration with tribes to address a wider set of program 

responsibilities and challenges. EPA also will fund targeted assistance initiatives focused on longstanding and mutually agreed-upon concerns in Indian country. 

Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) Grants

(FY 2012 PB: $164.8M, FY 2010 Enacted: $200.9M, FY 2012 Change: -$36.1M)
 

•	 Decreases funding for nonpoint source programs, including implementation of nonpoint source 

projects and statewide nonpoint source protection activities. 

•	 Reforms to program in FY 2012 will increase program’s effectiveness and help maximize its impact. 

15
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

Enforcement and Compliance 

Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas

(FY 2012 PB: $68.3M, FY 2010 Enacted: $40.8M, FY 2012 Change: +$27.5M) 

•	 Increase to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the compliance monitoring program with an 

emphasis on electronic reporting (e-reporting), enhanced data systems to collect, synthesize and 

disseminate monitoring data, and deployment of state of the art monitoring equipment to the field. 

•	 EPA will increase the number of inspections at high risk chemical and oil facilities regulated under the 

Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC), the Facility Response Plan (FRP), and the 

Risk Management Plan (RMP) regulations. 

•	 This proposal will begin to usher in a new enforcement paradigm, helping EPA and its state partners 

effectively protect communities, keep up to pace with our responsibilities and assure a level playing 

field for corporate America. 

Deepwater Horizon Litigation

(FY 2012 PB: $4.1M, FY 2010 Enacted: $1.1M, FY 2012 Change: +$3.0M) 

•	 EPA’s response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue in FY 2012 as the Agency provides 

support for the U.S. Department of Justice’s civil action and criminal investigations against those 

responsible for the Deepwater Horizon incident. 

Chemical Safety 

Chemical Risk Review and Reduction
 (FY 2012 PB: $71.0M, FY 2010 Enacted $54.9M, FY 2012 Change: +$16.1M) 

•	 This investment will more fully implement the Administrator’s Enhancing Chemical Safety Initiative. 

•	 Assuring the Safety of Chemicals is one of the Administrator’s highest priorities. The Agency will work 

to sustain significant and long overdue progress in assuring the safety of chemicals in our products, 

our environment and our bodies. 

•	 Additional funding will help EPA take action to strengthen information management and transparency, 

increase the pace of chemical hazard assessments, and reduce identified chemical risks. 

Healthy Communities 

Clean, Green, and Healthy Schools

(FY 2012 PB: $4.8M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.1M, FY 2012 Change: +$4.7M)
 

•	 As part of the Healthy Communities Initiative: Clean, Green and Healthy Schools, the program will 

continue working internally and with other agencies, states and tribes to expand coordinated 

implementation of successful community-based programs to improve children’s health outcomes, 

including increased technical assistance on school siting, environmental health guidelines, and 

Integrated Pest Management in schools. 

Air Toxics in Communities
 (FY 2012 PB: $6.4M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$6.4)
 

•	 Increase to conduct integrated pilots in several communities, particularly those including 

disadvantaged groups, to systematically evaluate and reduce risks from air toxics through regulatory, 

enforcement, and voluntary efforts. 

•	 Resources will support expanded analyses and information access by enhancing tools such as the 

National Air Pollution Assessment (NAPA), National Air Toxic Assessment (NATA), BenMAP, and Air 

Facility System (AFS). 

16
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

Sustainable Communities 

(FY 2012 PB: $9.9M, FY 2010 Enacted: $5.7M, FY 2012 Change: +$4.2M)
 

•	 Increase allows EPA to more fully implement the Partnership for Sustainable Communities with U.S. 

Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban and Development. 

•	 Increases technical assistance provided to Tribal, state, Regional, and local governments in 

integrating smart growth. 

Urban Waters
 (FY 2012 PB: $5.1M, FY 2010 Enacted: $0.0M, FY 2012 Change: +$5.1M)
 

•	 Funds for grants and targeted technical assistance to communities, especially disadvantaged 

communities to restore urban waters. 

•	 Will help address water quality challenges in urban watersheds and build the capacity of 

disadvantaged communities to protect and restore their environment through projects that revitalize 

these watersheds. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

(FY 2012 PB: $116.9M, FY 2010 Enacted: $123.3M, FY 2012 Change: -$6.4M)
 

•	 Includes a request of $2 million in new funding to support development of an electronic hazardous 

waste manifest system which will result in reduced reporting burdens for regulated entities. 

•	 As a result of this net reduction EPA will not offer tribal grants for integrated solid waste management 

planning and will reduce extramural support for regulation development. 

•	 Reduction will result in EPA discontinuing support for several voluntary programs including Carpet 

America and the National Partnership for Environmental Priorities (NPEP) program in order to 

enhance program focus on emerging priorities. 

Pollution Prevention
 (FY 2012 PB: $15.7M, FY 2010 Enacted: $18.1M, FY 2012 Change: -$2.4M)
 

•	 Resulting reduction will eliminate support to “green” the Agency’s facilities and procurement actions, 

and reduce the Green Chemistry program’s communications and outreach efforts. 

•	 Also, results in the termination of ongoing Design for the Environment partnerships, including those 

with the photovoltaic and automotive refinishing industries. 

Research 

Research Program

(FY 2012 PB: $584.1M, FY 2010 Enacted: $596.7M, FY 2012 Change: -$12.6M)
 

•	 Highlights of the request include a $24.7 million increase to support Science to Achieve Results 

(STAR) grants to conduct research in key areas in support of the Administrator’s priorities. 

•	 Requested STAR grant increases include resources for Hydraulic Fracturing ($4.2 million), Endocrine 

Disruptors ($7 million), Green Infrastructure ($6 million), and STAR fellowships ($6 million) in support 

of the Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) government wide initiative. 

•	 Also requests an additional $2 million for Computational Toxicology to speed development of next 

generation tools and facilitate implementation of the Agency’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening 

program. 

•	 Finally, a $2 million increase is requested to support the plan for a long-term review of EPA’s 

laboratory network. 

•	 These increases are offset by reductions to Sustainable and Healthy Communities research ($17.5 

million), Homeland Security Research ($8.2 million), Air, Climate, and Energy Research ($3.4), and 

other targeted reductions. 

17
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlights of Major Budget Changes 

Superfund 

Superfund Program

(FY 2012 PB: $1,236.2M, FY 2010 Enacted: $1,306.5M, FY 2012 Change: -$70.3M)
 

•	 Request includes $810.8 million for the Superfund Cleanup programs to address emergencies 

(Superfund Emergency Response and Removal) and the Nation’s most contaminated hazardous 

waste sites (Superfund Remedial and Federal Facilities). 

•	 $30.9 million and 13.2 FTE reduction in the Remedial program explores program efficiencies and 

recognizes fiscal constraints, will postpone new remedial construction starts and may slow down 

steps that lead up to being ready for construction, including site assessment and characterization 

projects and site analytical services support. 

•	 $7.4 million and 10.8 FTE reduction in the Removal program will be primarily applied to reductions in 

Superfund-lead removal actions while EPA continues to focus on encouraging PRPs to conduct 

removal actions and undertakes an effort to identify efficiencies in program operations and 

management. 

•	 $5.9 million and 16.0 FTE reduction in the Federal Facilities program will reduce EPA’s work at nonNPL sites to minimize impacts in meeting our statutory requirements at federal NPL sites. Combined 

with the reduction to Superfund Remedial, the Agency’s ability to achieve goals such as the annual 

number of Superfund sites with remedy construction completed may also be affected going forward. 

•	 $2.8 million and 30.0 FTE reduction will decrease EPA enforcement staff available to identify, locate 

and reach settlement with PRPs to clean up sites or recover trust fund dollars expended. 

Other Significant FY 2012 Changes 

The Agency also proposed a number of changes to increase program effectiveness as well as to reflect 

programmatic and administrative efficiencies. The reductions, savings, and policy recommendations 

reflect our commitment to being thoughtful stewards of public funds. 

Administrative Efficiency Initiative

•	 Total $40.0 million reduction across multiple program projects is part of the government-wide 

initiative. This initiative targets certain categories of spending for efficiencies and reductions, 

including advisory contracts, general services, printing and supplies. EPA will continue its work to 

redesign processes and streamline activities in both administrative and programmatic areas to 

achieve these savings. 

Superfund Tax Reinstatement

•	 The Administration supports reinstating the Superfund taxes to ensure that parties who benefit from 

the manufacture or sale of substances commonly found in hazardous waste sites contribute to the 

cost of cleanup. 

•	 Since the expiration of Superfund tax, Superfund program funding has been largely financed from 

General Revenue transfers to the Superfund Trust Fund, thus burdening the general public with the 

costs of cleaning up hazardous waste sites. 

•	 Reinstating the Superfund taxes would provide a stable, dedicated source of revenue to be placed in 

the Superfund Trust Fund where the revenues would be available for appropriation by Congress to 

support the cleanup of the Nation’s most contaminated sites. 

LUST Trust Fund Financing Tax

•	 The LUST Trust Fund financing tax on fuel was most recently reauthorized in the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 and expires on September 30, 2011. 

•	 The Administration supports reauthorizing the LUST Trust Fund financing tax which funds clean-ups 

in cases where tank owners and operators are unable to pay for cleanups at sites for which they have 

responsibility, or where a responsible party cannot be identified. 

18
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air 

Quality 

Strategic Goal: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop adaptation 

strategies to address climate change, and protect and improve air quality. 

12.5% of Budget 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000) 

Difference 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2010 EN 

Enacted Annualized President’s to FY 2012 

Budget CR Budget PresBud 

1 - Address Climate Change $196,886 $196,886 $252,854 $55,968 

2 - Improve Air Quality $872,147 $872,147 $820,451 ($51,696) 

3 - Restore the Ozone Layer $18,663 $18,663 $18,160 ($503) 

4 - Reduce Unnecessary 

Exposure to Radiation $42,732 $42,732 $39,454 ($3,278) 

Goal 1 Total $1,130,428 $1,130,428 $1,130,919 $491 

Workyears 2,735 2,735 2,809 74 

NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations. 

Introduction 

EPA has dedicated itself to protecting and improving the quality of the Nation’s air to 

promote public health and protect the environment. Air pollution concerns are diverse 

and significant, and include: greenhouse gases (GHGs) and climate change, outdoor 

and indoor air quality, radon, stratospheric ozone depletion, and radiation protection. 

Since passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments in 1990, nationwide air quality has 

improved significantly. Despite this progress, about 127 million Americans (about 40% 

of the US population) lived in counties with air that did not meet health-based standards 

for at least one pollutant in 2009. Long-term exposure to elevated levels of certain air 

pollutants has been associated with increased risk of cancer, premature mortality, and 

damage to the immune, neurological, reproductive, cardiovascular, and respiratory 

systems. Short-term exposure to elevated levels of certain air pollutants can 

exacerbate asthma and lead to other adverse health effects; additional impacts 

associated with increased air pollution levels include missed work and school days. 

19
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

Because people spend much of their lives indoors, the quality of indoor air also is a 

major concern. Twenty percent of the population spends the day indoors in elementary 

and secondary schools, where problems with leaky roofs and with heating, ventilation, 

and air conditioning systems can lead to increased presence of molds and other 

environmental allergens which can trigger a host of health problems, including asthma 

and allergies. Exposure to indoor radon is related to an estimated 20,000 lung cancer 

deaths each year. 

The issues of highest importance facing the air program over the next few years will be 

ozone and particulate air pollution, interstate transport of air pollutants, emissions from 

transportation sources, toxic air pollutants, indoor air pollutants (including radon), and 

GHGs. EPA uses a variety of approaches to reduce pollutants in indoor and outdoor 

air. The Agency works with other federal agencies; state, Tribal, and local 

governments; and international partners and stakeholders; and employs strategies that 

include: traditional regulatory tools; innovative, market-based techniques; public- and 

private-sector partnerships; community-based approaches; voluntary programs that 

promote environmental stewardship; and programs that encourage cost-effective 

technologies and practices. 

EPA’s air toxic control programs are critical to EPA’s continued progress in reducing 

public health risks and improving the quality of the environment. EPA has been unable 

to meet many of the statutory deadlines for air toxics standards established in the Clean 

Air Act due to numerous unfavorable court decisions, inherent management challenges, 

complexity of risk modeling frameworks, and budget constraints over the past decade 

as resources have shifted to managing criteria pollutants that pose higher overall health 

risks. Lawsuits over missed deadlines have in many cases set the Agency’s agenda, 

rather than health and environmental outcomes. Working with litigants and informed by 

analysis of air quality health risk data, EPA is working to prioritize key air toxics 

regulations for completion in 2011 and 2012 that can be completed expeditiously and 

that will address significant risks to the public health. 

The supply and diversity of biofuels in America is growing every year, and a new 

generation of automobile technologies, including several new plug-in hybrids and allelectric vehicles, is literally “hitting the road” this year. Because EPA is responsible for 

establishing the test procedures needed to estimate the fuel economy of new vehicles, 

and for verifying car manufacturers’ data on fuel economy, the Agency is investing in 

additional testing and certification capacity to ensure that new vehicles, engines, and 

fuels are in compliance with new vehicle and fuel standards. In particular, compared to 

conventional vehicles, advanced technology vehicles like Plug-in Hybrid Electric 

Vehicles (PHEV) and Battery Electric Vehicles (EV) require additional testing. Current 

electric vehicle dynamometer testing can occupy test cells for several shifts, since the 

current test procedures require the vehicles run through their entire battery charge. 

Improved, shortened EV test procedures are under development by EPA. PHEV testing 

may actually consume more time than EV testing, due primarily to the requirement that 

PHEVs be tested in both electric/electric assist mode and in hybrid mode. Without 

20
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

testing PHEVs in both modes, EPA cannot accurately determine PHEV fuel economy 

and emissions compliance. The new standards for vehicle greenhouse gas emissions 

in particular will require EPA to more frequently verify car manufacturers’ data for a 

greater variety of vehicle engine technologies. To prepare for this workload, the 

Agency will continue its support of the multi-year National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions 

Laboratory (NVFEL) modernization effort. 

Major FY 2012 Investment Areas 

Air Toxics 

In FY 2012, EPA will invest $6.1 million in several activities that support the air toxics 

program. $3.1 million will be targeted at improvements in monitoring capabilities on 

source-specific and ambient bases. These funds will also improve the dissemination of 

information between and amongst the various EPA offices, the state, local and tribal 

governments, and the public. The remaining $2.9 million of this investment will be used 

for enhancing tools such as the National Air Pollution Assessment (NAPA), National Air 

Toxic Assessment (NATA), BenMAP, and Air Facility System (AFS), which will also 

improve monitoring capabilities. EPA anticipates that this investment will substantially 

increase the Agency’s ability to meet aggressive court ordered schedules to complete 

rulemaking activities, such as standards to address the refining sector where 25 rules 

must be acted upon in the fiscal year. This investment will also assist the Agency in its 

work to complete or develop an additional 150 rules in FY 2013 that are under legal or 

statutory deadlines. 

Support for State Air Quality Management 

EPA is investing an additional $77 million in state assistance grants to support NAAQS 

implementation and greenhouse gas permitting. Specific increases include $25 million 

to assist in permitting greenhouse gas emissions sources. These funds will develop 

and deploy to states the technical capacity needed to address greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions in permitting under the Clean Air Act. An additional $52 million will support 

increased state workload for implementation of updated National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. This investment includes requested funding of $15 million for additional 

state air monitors, as required by the revised NAAQS The request also includes an 

additional $37.0 million to support state activities, including revising state 

implementation plans (SIPs) and developing models and emissions inventories needed 

for multi-state air quality management strategies. 

Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions 

In order to promote fiscal responsibility EPA is also making the tough choices, including: 

•	 In the face of significant budget constraints, EPA has made the difficult budget 

decision to not propose new DERA grant funding in FY 2012. During this time, 

the program will continue to support already on-going projects funded through 

21
 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

DERA and stimulus funds, adding to the tremendous public health benefits 

associated with the program that have resulted from significant reductions in air 

pollution, particularly in our cities and around our ports and transportation hubs. 

•	 Discontinuing the Climate Leaders program as large businesses find assistance 

with their energy-saving and GHG reducing actions through private entities. 

•	 Reducing funding for the Indoor Air program’s partnership and outreach to 

external stakeholders and for the Radiation and Indoor Environments 

laboratories. 

Priority Goals 

EPA has established two Priority Goals to improve the country’s ability to measure and 

control Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. The Priority Goals are: 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Mandatory Reporting Rule 

•	 By June 15, 2011, EPA will make publically available 100 percent of facility-level 

GHG emissions data submitted to EPA in accordance with the GHG Reporting 

Rule, compliant with policies protecting Confidential Business Information (CBI). 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Light Duty Vehicles 

•	 In 2011, EPA, working with DOT, will begin implementation of regulations 

designed to reduce the GHG emissions from light duty vehicles sold in the US 

starting with model year 2012. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to track progress towards its Priority Goals and will 

update goals as necessary and appropriate. 

FY 2012 Activities 

Reducing GHG Emissions and Developing Adaptation Strategies to Address 

Climate Change 

Climate change poses risks to public health, the environment, cultural resources, the 

economy, and quality of life. Many effects of climate change are already evident and 

some will persist into the future regardless of future levels of GHG emissions. Climate 

change impacts include higher temperatures and may lead to more stagnant air masses 

which are expected to make it more challenging to achieve air quality standards for 

smog in many regions of the country, adversely affecting public health if areas cannot 

attain or maintain clean air. Another example is that a rise in sea level or increased 

precipitation intensity may increase flooding, which could affect water quality if large 

volumes of water transport contaminants and overload storm and wastewater systems. 

In order to protect public health and the environment, EPA and air and water quality 

managers at the state, tribal, and local levels must recognize and consider the 

challenge a changing climate poses to their mission. 

22
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

Responding to the threat of climate change is one of the Agency's top priorities. EPA’s 

strategies to address climate change support the President's GHG emissions reduction 

goals. We will work with partners and stakeholders to provide tools and information 

related to GHG emissions and impacts, and will reduce GHG emissions domestically 

and internationally through cost-effective, voluntary programs while pursuing additional 

regulatory actions as needed. 

In FY 2012, the Agency will begin some new areas of activity, expand some existing 

strategies, and discontinue others. 

These efforts include: 

•	 Implementing new standards to reduce emissions from cars and light-duty trucks 

for model years 2012 through 2016, extending that program to model year 2017 

and beyond, and creating a similar program to reduce GHGs from medium- and 

heavy-duty trucks for model years 2014-2018. 

•	 Establishing permitting requirements for facilities including utilities and refineries 

that emit large amounts of GHGs to encourage design and construction of more 

efficient and advanced processes that will contribute to a clean energy economy. 

•	 Promulgating New Source Performance Standards for greenhouse gases for the 

electric utility generation and refinery sectors. 

•	 Implementing voluntary programs that reduce GHGs through the greater use of 

energy efficient technologies and products. 

•	 Implementing a national system for reporting GHG emissions; implementing 

permitting requirements for new and modified facilities that emit substantial 

amounts of GHGs. 

•	 Working with Congress on options for cost-effective legislation to promote a 

clean energy future and address GHG emissions. 

•	 Developing a comprehensive report to Congress on black carbon that will provide 

a foundation for evaluating future approaches to black carbon mitigation. 

•	 Identifying and assessing substitute chemical and ozone-depleting substances 

and processes for their global warming potential. 

•	 Educating the public about climate change and actions people can take to reduce 

GHG emissions. 

Improving Air Quality 

Clean Air 

Addressing outdoor air pollution and the interstate transport of air pollution are top 

priorities for the Agency. Elevated levels of air pollution are linked to thousands of 

asthma cases and heart attacks, and almost 2 million lost school or work days. EPA 

recently strengthened the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for lead, 

sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide, is in the process of reviewing the particulate matter 

and carbon monoxide standards, and is reconsidering the 2008 ozone standard. Over 

23
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

the next few years, EPA will work with states and Tribes to designate areas where the 

air does not meet these standards, and develop and implement plans to meet the 

NAAQS. In FY 2011, EPA plans to finalize the Transport Rule, which is expected to be 

implemented in FY 2012. This rule will reduce power plant emissions that drift across 

the borders of 31 eastern states and the District of Columbia. The new transport rule, 

along with local and state air pollution controls, is designed to help areas in the eastern 

United States meet existing health standards for ozone and particulate matter. As EPA 

addresses these pollutants, the Agency also is working to improve the overall air quality 

management system and address the air quality challenges expected over the next 10 

to 20 years. This includes working with partners and stakeholders to develop 

comprehensive air quality strategies that address multiple pollutants and consider the 

interplay between air quality and factors such as land use, energy, and transportation. 

Mobile sources (including light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles; on-road vehicles and offroad engines; as well as ships, aircraft and trains) contribute a substantial percentage of 

the nation’s pollution burden. EPA addresses emissions from motor vehicles, engines, 

and fuels through an integrated strategy that combines regulatory approaches that take 

advantage of technological advances and cleaner and higher-quality fuels with voluntary 

programs that reduce vehicle, engine, and equipment activity and emissions. Future 

regulatory activity includes proposing Tier 3 vehicle and fuel standards in FY 2012 in 

response to the May 2010 Presidential Directive and new on-board diagnostic 

requirements for non-road diesel engines. In the fuels area, EPA is working with 

refiners, renewable fuel producers, and others to implement regulations to increase the 

amount of renewable fuel blended into gasoline. 

Air Toxics 

As part of the investment in air toxics, EPA will work with affected communities to 

address risks and track progress, with additional emphasis on communities that may be 

disproportionately impacted by toxic air emissions. The Agency will continue to work 

with state and local air pollution control agencies and community groups to assess and 

address air toxics emissions in areas of greatest concern, including where the most 

vulnerable members of our population live, work, and go to school. EPA is implementing 

a sector-based strategy to develop rules that will achieve the greatest reductions in risks 

from air toxics, provide regulatory certainty for sources, and meet the statutory 

requirements of the Clean Air Act. The sector-based strategy and the investment in FY 

2012 will assist EPA in addressing 25 rules in the refining sector that are under legal 

deadlines and various Risk Technology Reviews (RTR) that are under legal deadlines. 

This strategy includes: 

•	 Prioritize rules for large stationary sources of air toxics, providing the greatest 

opportunity for cost-effective emissions reductions; including petroleum refining; iron 

and steel; chemical manufacturing; utilities; non-utility boilers; oil and gas; and 

Portland cement. Emissions from every one of these seven key categories occur in 

areas where there is the potential to disproportionately affect minority communities. 

24
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

•	 Reduce air toxic emissions from chemical plants and refineries. While many 

chemical and refining emission points are well understood, some sources, such as 

leaks from process piping, startups and shutdown, malfunctions, flaring, and 

wastewater are more difficult to characterize, and may not be sufficiently controlled. 

•	 Provide better information to communities through monitoring, including facility fence 

line and remote monitoring, and national assessments. 

•	 Involve other related organizations and stakeholders in planning and 

implementation. 

•	 Improve data collection both through efforts directed by OAR and through enhanced 

data collection during enforcement activities. 

Indoor Air 

The Indoor Air Program characterizes the risks of indoor air pollutants to human health 

including radon, environmental triggers of asthma, and tobacco smoke; develops 

techniques for reducing those risks; and educates the public about indoor air quality 

(IAQ) actions they can take to reduce their risks from IAQ problems. Often the people 

most exposed to indoor air pollutants are those most susceptible to the effects—the 

young, the elderly, and the chronically ill. In FY 2012, funding will be reduced for 

partnership and outreach support with external stakeholders and the Radiation and 

Indoor Environments National Laboratory (R&IE), and the Tools for Schools program 

will be eliminated. Despite these reductions, EPA will continue to educate and 

encourage individuals, local communities, school officials, industry, the health-care 

community, Tribal programs, and others to take action to reduce health risks in indoor 

environments such as homes, schools, and workplaces. Outreach includes national 

public awareness and media campaigns, as well as community-based outreach and 

education. EPA also uses technology-transfer to improve the design, operation, and 

maintenance of buildings – including schools, homes, and workplaces – to promote 

healthier indoor air. The focus of all these efforts is to support communities’ and state 

and local agencies’ efforts to address indoor air quality health risks. 

The Radon Program promotes action to reduce the public's risk to indoor radon (second 

only to smoking as a cause of lung cancer). In FY 2012, EPA will reduce regional 

support for Radon Program outreach, education, guidance, and technical assistance. 

Despite these reductions, this non-regulatory program will continue to encourage and 

facilitate national, regional, state, and Tribal programs and activities that support 

initiatives targeted to radon testing and mitigation, as well as to radon resistant new 

construction. Funding is maintained for the State Indoor Radon Grant Program, which 

provides categorical grants to develop, implement, and enhance programs that assess 

and mitigate radon risks. In FY 2011, EPA launched a new radon initiative with other 

federal agencies to significantly increase attention to radon testing, mitigation and public 

education opportunities within each agency’s sphere of responsibility. Implementation 

of these strategies will be pursued in FY 2012. 

25
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

Stratospheric Ozone – Domestic and Montreal Protocol 

EPA’s stratospheric ozone protection program implements the provisions of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the Act) and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that 

Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), continuing the control and reduction of 

ozone depleting substances (ODS) in the U.S. and lowering health risks to the 

American public. As ODS and many of their substitutes are also potent GHGs, 

appropriate control and reduction of these substances also provides significant benefits 

for climate protection. The Act provides for a phase out of production and consumption 

of ODS and requires controls on their use, including banning certain emissive uses, 

requiring labeling to inform consumer choices, and requiring sound servicing practices 

for the use of ODS in various products (e.g., air conditioning and refrigeration). The Act 

also prohibits venting ODS or their substitutes, including other Fluorinated gases (Fgases) such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol, 

the U.S. is committed to ensuring that our domestic program is at least as stringent as 

international obligations and to regulating and enforcing its terms domestically. In FY 

2012, EPA will focus its work to ensure that ODS production and import caps under the 

Montreal Protocol and Clean Air Act continue to be met. 

Radiation 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to work with other federal agencies, states, Tribes, 

stakeholders, and international radiation protection organizations to develop and use 

voluntary and regulatory programs, public information, and training to reduce public 

exposure to radiation. Responding to advances in uranium production processes and 

mining operations, the Agency is updating its radiation protection standards for the 

uranium fuel cycle, which were developed over 30 years ago, to ensure that they 

continue to be protective of public health and the environment. In FY 2012, EPA’s 

Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT), a component of the Agency’s 

emergency response structure, will continue to ensure that it maintains and improves 

the level of readiness to support federal radiological emergency response and recovery 

operations under the National Response Framework (NRF) and the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). 

Research 

In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing a 

more integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of 

individually. This approach will create synergy and yield benefits beyond those possible 

from approaches that are more narrowly targeted to single chemicals or problem areas. 

EPA is realigning and integrating the work of twelve of its base research programs into 

four new research programs (further described in the Highlighted programs section of 

the appendix): 

• Air, Climate, and Energy 

• Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 

26
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

•	 Sustainable and Healthy Communities 

•	 Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

The new Air, Climate and Energy (ACE) program (Figure 1) integrates existing EPA 

research programs on environmental and human health impacts related to air pollution, 

mercury, climate change, and biofuels. Protecting human health and the environment 

from the effects of air pollution and climate change, while sustainably meeting the 

demands of a growing population and economy, is critical to the well-being of the nation 

and the world. As we explore emerging technologies to reduce emissions, we are 

challenged by uncertainties surrounding human health and environmental risks from 

exposure to an evolving array of air pollutants. This multifaceted environment reflects 

the interplay of air quality, the changing climate, and emerging energy options. By 

integrating air, climate and energy research EPA will conduct research to understand 

the complexity of these interactions and provide models and tools necessary for 

communities and for policy makers at all levels of government to make the best 

decisions. 

The ACE research program is working with partners from across EPA, as well as 

applicable external stakeholders, to identify the critical science questions that will be 

addressed under three major research themes. 

•	 Theme 1: Develop and evaluate multi-pollutant, regional, and sector-based 

approaches and advance more cost-effective and innovative strategies to reduce 

air emissions that adversely affect atmospheric integrity. 

•	 Theme 2: Assess the impacts of atmospheric pollution, accounting for 

interactions between climate change, air quality, and water quality. 

•	 Theme 3: Provide environmental modeling, monitoring, metrics, and information 

needed by communities to adapt to the impacts of climate change. 

Figure 1: This illustrates the 

EPA Research budget under 

the FY 2012 Budget Request, 

which includes 4 new 

integrated programs and 

continues 2 programs. The 

new integrated Air, Climate 

and Energy Research program 

will address EPA Strategic 

Plan Goal 1: Taking Action on 

Climate Change and Ensuring 

Air Quality. This budget 

structure will maximize the 

effectiveness and efficiency of 

EPA’s new integrated, 

transdisciplinary approach to 

research, which will catalyze 

innovative, sustainable 

solutions to the problems being 

addressed by our research 

partners. 

27
 

 

 

Goal 1: Taking Action on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality 

In FY 2012, the ACE research program will study the generation, fate, transport, and 

chemical transformation of air emissions to identify individual and population health 

risks. The program will incorporate air, climate, and biofuel research to ensure the 

development of sustainable solutions and attainment of statutory goals in a complex 

multipollutant environment. The ACE program will conduct research to better 

understand and assess the effects of global change on air quality, water quality, aquatic 

ecosystems, land use (e.g. for biofuel feedstocks), human health and social well being 

and will conduct systems-based sustainability analyses that include environmental, 

social and economic dimensions. Research will also determine how the use of new and 

existing biofuels will affect critical ecosystem services and human health. The goal of 

this work is to explore how modified behaviors and technology designs could decrease 

the potential impacts of biofuels. EPA will continue to leverage the success of the 

Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program, which supports innovative and 

cutting-edge research from scientists in academia through a competitive and peerreviewed grant process that is integrated with EPA’s overall research efforts. 

28
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

Strategic Goal: Protect and restore our waters to ensure that drinking water is safe, 

and that aquatic ecosystems sustain fish, plants and wildlife, and economic, 

recreational, and subsistence activities. 

48.1% of Budget 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000) 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Difference 

FY 2010 EN 

to FY 2012 

PresBud 

1 - Protect Human Health $1,837,338 $1,837,338 $1,369,962 ($467,376) 

2 - Protect and Restore Watersheds 

and Aquatic Ecosystems $3,808,001 $3,808,001 $2,972,683 ($835,318) 

Goal 2 Total $5,645,340 $5,645,340 $4,342,646 ($1,302,694) 

Workyears 3,502 3,502 3,434 (68) 

NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations. 

FY 2012 President’s Budget totals exclude a $50 million cancellation, which will impact Goal 2. 

Introduction 

While much progress has been made, America’s waters remain imperiled. From 

nutrient loadings and stormwater runoff to invasive species and drinking water 

contaminants, water quality and enforcement programs face complex challenges that 

demand both traditional and innovative strategies. EPA will work hand-in-hand with 

states and tribes to develop nutrient limits and intensify our work to restore and protect 

the quality of the nation’s streams, rivers, lakes, bays, oceans, and aquifers. We will 

also use our authority to protect and restore threatened natural treasures such as the 

Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, and the Gulf of Mexico; to address our neglected 

urban rivers; to ensure safe drinking water; and, to reduce pollution from nonpoint and 

industrial dischargers. EPA will continue to work on measures to address postconstruction runoff, water-quality impairments from surface mining, and drinking water 

contamination. 

29
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

Recent national surveys1 have found that our waters are stressed by nutrient pollution, 

excess sedimentation, and degradation of shoreline vegetation, which affect upwards of 

50 percent of our lakes and streams. The rate at which new waters are listed for water 

quality impairments exceeds the pace at which restored waters are removed from the 

list. For many years, nonpoint source pollution, principally nitrogen, phosphorus, and 

sediments, has been recognized as the largest remaining impediment to improving 

water quality. However, pollution discharged from industrial, municipal, agricultural, and 

stormwater point sources continue to cause a decline in the quality of our waters. Other 

significant contributors include loss of habitat and habitat fragmentation, and hydrologic 

alteration. 

To continue making progress, the Agency needs effective partnerships with the states, 

tribes and communities. We will continue the increased focus on communities, 

particularly those disadvantaged communities facing disproportionate impacts or having 

been historically underserved. 

As part of the Administration’s long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable 

Water Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with States and Communities to 

enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity. Important to the technical 

capacity will be enhancing alternatives analysis to expand "green infrastructure" options 

and their multiple benefits. Future year budgets for the State Revolving Funds (SRFs) 

gradually adjust, taking into account repayments, through 2016 with the goal of 

providing, on average, about 5 percent of water infrastructure spending annually. When 

coupled with increasing repayments from loans made in past years by states, the 

annual funding will allow the SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water 

and drinking water infrastructure. Federal dollars provided through the SRFs will act as 

a catalyst for efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable 

water infrastructure. Overall, the Administration requests a combined $2.5 billion for the 

SRFs. 

Major FY 2012 Investment Areas 

Water Quality 

The Section 106 grant program supports prevention and control measures that improve 

water quality. In FY 2012, EPA is requesting a total additional investment of $21 million 

in Section 106 funding of which $18.3 million will strengthen state and interstate 

programs to address Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), nutrient and wet weather 

issues. Approximately $2.7 million of the additional funding will be directed to eligible 

tribes to meet funding needs for tribal water quality programs. 

1 U.S. EPA, 2006. Wadeable Streams Assessment: A Collaborative Survey of the Nation’s Streams. EPA 841-B06-002. Available at http://www.epa.gov/owow/streamsurvey. See also EPA, 2010. National Lakes Assessment: A 

Collaborative Survey of the Nation’s Lakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. Available at 

http://www.epa.gov/lakessurvey/pdf/nla_chapter0.pdf. 

30
 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

Drinking Water 

In FY 2012, an additional $5.2 million is being requested to replace obsolete and 

expensive to maintain drinking water information system technology, support state data 

management, develop the capability to post drinking water compliance monitoring data 

on a secured internet portal, facilitate compliance monitoring data collection and 

transfer, and improve data quality. EPA, in concert with states, is working to collect and 

display all compliance monitoring data as part of the Drinking Water Strategy. This 

increase will also be used to replace SDWIS-State, reducing state need to keep 

individual compliance databases. 

Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions 

•	 Reducing funds for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program, while 

continuing federal support for safe drinking water, will result in fewer new 

projects. 

•	 Reducing funds for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, while continuing 

federal support clean water infrastructure, will result in fewer projects. 

•	 Reducing funds for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, while maintaining a 

significant investment in activities such as sediment cleanup and habitat 

restoration. 

•	 Reducing funds for state Nonpoint Source grants will result in 100 to 150 fewer 

projects as compared to 716 projects funded in FY 2010. 

Priority Goals 

EPA has established two Priority Goals to improve water quality. The Priority Goals 

are: 

Improve Water Quality: Chesapeake Bay 

•	 Chesapeake Bay watershed states (including the District of Columbia) will 

develop and submit approvable Phase I watershed implementation plans by the 

end of CY 2010 and Phase II plans by the end of CY 2011 in support of EPA’s 

final Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). 

Improve Water Quality: Drinking Water Standards 

•	 Over the next two years, EPA will initiate review/revision of at least 4 drinking 

water standards to strengthen public health protection. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to track progress towards its Priority Goals and will 

update goals as necessary and appropriate. 

31
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

FY 2012 Activities 

EPA has identified core water program activities within its safe and clean water 

programs in FY 2012 to highlight three of the Administrator’s priority areas: Urban 

Waters, the Drinking Water Strategy, and Climate Change. 

The National Water Program will continue to place emphasis on watershed stewardship, 

watershed-based approaches, water efficiencies, and best practices through 

Environmental Management Systems. EPA will specifically focus on green 

infrastructure, nutrients, and trading among point sources and non-point sources for 

water quality upgrades. In FY 2012, the Agency will continue advancing the water 

quality monitoring initiative and a water quality standards strategy under the Clean 

Water Act, as well as important rules and activities under the Safe Drinking Water Act. 

Related efforts to improve monitoring and surveillance will help advance water security 

nationwide. 

In FY 2012, the Agency will begin some new areas of activity, expand some existing 

strategies, and discontinue others. 

Drinking Water 

To help achieve the Administrator’s priority to protect America’s waters, in FY 2012, 

EPA will continue to implement the new Drinking Water Strategy, a new approach to 

expanding public health protection for drinking water. The Agency will focus on 

regulating groups of drinking water contaminants, improving water treatment 

technology, utilizing the authority of multiple statutes where appropriate, and, expanding 

its communication with states, tribes and communities. to increase confidence in the 

quality of drinking water. 

During FY 2012, EPA, the states, and community water systems will build on past 

successes while working toward the FY 2012 goal of assuring that 91 percent of the 

population served by community water systems receives drinking water that meets all 

applicable health-based standards. States carry out a variety of activities, such as 

conducting onsite sanitary surveys of water systems and working with small systems to 

improve their capabilities. EPA will work to improve implementation by providing 

guidance, training, and technical assistance; ensuring proper certification of water 

system operators; promoting consumer awareness of drinking water safety; and 

maintaining the rate of system sanitary surveys and onsite reviews to promote 

compliance with drinking water standards. 

To help ensure that water is safe to drink and because aging drinking water 

infrastructure can impact water quality, EPA requests $990 million to continue EPA’s 

commitment for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. This request will fund new 

infrastructure improvement projects for public drinking water systems. EPA will, in 

concert with the states, focus this affordable, flexible financial assistance to support 

utility compliance with safe drinking water standards. EPA will also work with utilities to 

32
 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

promote technical, financial, and managerial capacity as a critical means to meet 

infrastructure needs, and further enhance program performance and efficiency. 

Homeland Security 

EPA has a major role in supporting the protection of the nation’s critical water 

infrastructure from terrorist threats. In FY 2012, EPA will continue efforts towards 

protecting the nation’s water infrastructure. In FY 2012, the Agency will provide 

technical support to the existing Water Security Initiative (WSI) pilots, assist in 

conducting outreach efforts to migrate lessons learned from the pilots to the water 

sector, and develop and execute an approach to promote national voluntary adoption of 

effective and sustainable drinking water contamination warning systems. The FY 2012 

request includes $7.4 million for WSI pilot support and evaluation activities, as well as 

dissemination of information and transfer of knowledge. Additionally, the FY 2012 

request includes $1.3 million for Water Laboratory Alliance for threat reduction efforts. 

Clean Water 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to collaborate with states and tribes to make progress 

toward EPA’s clean water goals. EPA’s FY 2012 request includes a total of $444 million 

in categorical grants for clean water programs. EPA will implement core clean water 

programs and promising innovations on a watershed basis to accelerate water quality 

improvements. Building on 30 years of clean water successes, EPA, in conjunction with 

states and tribes, will implement the Clean Water Act by focusing on TMDLs and 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits built upon 

scientifically sound water quality standards, technology-based pollutant discharge limits, 

effective water monitoring, strong programs for controlling nonpoint sources of pollution, 

stringent discharge permit programs, and revolving fund capitalization grants to our 

partners to build, revive, and “green” our aging infrastructure. 

WQ-8a 

# of TMDLs that are established or approved by EPA 

[Total TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with national 

policy (cumulative) 

15000 

20000 

25000 

30000 

35000 

40000 

45000 

50000 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

Annual Target 

End-of-Year Results 

33
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

The Agency’s FY 2012 request continues the monitoring initiative begun in 2005 to 

strengthen the nationwide monitoring network and complete statistically-valid surveys of 

the nation’s waters. The results of these efforts are scientifically-defensible water 

quality data and information essential for cleaning up and protecting the nation’s waters. 

Progress in improving coastal and ocean waters documented in the National Coastal 

Condition Report, will focus on assessing coastal conditions, reducing vessel 

discharges, implementing coastal nonpoint source pollution programs, managing 

dredged material and supporting international marine pollution control. EPA will 

continue to provide annual capitalization to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund 

(CWSRF) to enable EPA partners to improve wastewater treatment, non-point sources 

of pollution, and estuary revitalization. Realizing the long-term benefits derived from the 

CWSRF, EPA is continuing our CWSRF commitment by requesting $1.55 billion in FY 

2012. 

By integrating sustainable community efforts and urban water quality efforts, EPA plans 

to assist communities, particularly underserved communities, in restoring their urban 

waters. EPA will help communities become active participants in restoration and 

protection by helping to increase their awareness and stewardship of local urban 

waters. Safe and clean urban waters can enhance economic, educational, recreational, 

and social opportunities. By linking water quality improvement activities to these 

community priorities and partnering with federal, state, local, and non-governmental 

partners, EPA will help to sustain local commitment over the longer time frame that is 

required for water quality improvement. In FY 2012, EPA will provide grants to 

reconnect communities with their local urban waters and engage them in local 

restoration efforts. Focus areas may include: promoting green infrastructure to reduce 

contaminated, urban runoff; promoting volunteer monitoring; and tailoring outreach to 

communities. As urban waters impact large populations in both urban and upstream 

areas, this grants program will offer visibility to innovative approaches for water quality 

improvement that can be adapted in surrounding communities, thus promoting 

replication of successful practices. 

EPA will continue to address climate change impacts to water resource programs as 

well as to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions resulting from water activities by building 

capacity to consider climate change as core missions under the Clean Water Act and 

Safe Drinking Water Act are implemented. Climate change will exacerbate water quality 

stressors such as stormwater and nutrient pollution and could add new stressors such 

as those related to the expanding renewable energy development. WaterSense, 

Climate Ready Estuaries, Climate Ready Water Utilities and Green Infrastructure are 

examples of programs that will help stakeholders adapt to climate change in FY 2012, 

and programs targeted at vulnerable populations will be increasingly important. Efforts 

to incorporate climate change considerations into key programs will help protect water 

quality as well as the nation’s investment in drinking water and wastewater treatment 

infrastructure. 

34
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

Geographic Water Programs 

The Administration has launched numerous cross-agency collaborations to promote 

coordination among agencies toward achieving Presidential priorities, which include a 

suite of large aquatic ecosystem restoration efforts. Three prominent examples of this 

kind of cross-agency collaboration for EPA are cooperative restoration efforts in the 

Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. These three large water bodies 

have been exposed to substantial pollution over many years and a coordinated federal 

response is critical for maintaining progress on environmental priorities. Coastal 

estuaries and wetlands are also vulnerable. Working with stakeholders, EPA has 

established special programs to protect and restore each of these unique resources. 

EPA’s ecosystem protection programs encompass a wide range of approaches that 

address specific at-risk regional areas and larger categories of threatened systems, 

such as urban waters, estuaries, and wetlands. Locally generated pollution, combined 

with pollution carried by rivers and streams and through air deposition, can accumulate 

in these ecosystems and degrade them over time. EPA and Federal partners will 

continue to coordinate with States, Tribes, municipalities, and industry to restore the 

integrity of imperiled waters of the United States. 

Great Lakes: 

EPA is providing $350 million in funding for ecosystem restoration efforts for the Great 

Lakes, the largest freshwater system in the world. This EPA-led interagency effort to 

restore the Great Lakes focuses on priority environmental issues such as contaminated 

sediments and toxics, nonpoint source pollution, habitat degradation and loss, and 

invasive species. 

To restore and protect this national treasure, the Obama Administration developed the 

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). Led by EPA, the GLRI invests in the region’s 

environmental and public health through a coordinated interagency process. Principal 

agencies involved in the GLRI are USDA, NOAA, HHS, DHS, HUD, DOS, DOD-Army, 

DOI, and DOT. In FY 2012, EPA will continue to lead the implementation of the Great 

Lakes Restoration Initiative, implementing both federal projects and projects with states, 

tribes, municipalities, universities, and other organizations. Progress will continue in 

each of the GLRI’s five focus areas through implementation of on-the-ground actions. 

The GLRI provides the level of investment and the interagency coordination required to 

successfully address these five issues across the region. The initiative will specifically 

target work to restore beneficial uses in Areas of Concern, including Great Lakes 

Legacy Act projects, nearshore work, and habitat restoration, prioritizing delistings of 

Areas of Concern. 

The initiative identifies $350 million for programs and projects strategically chosen to 

target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem, a 

$125 million decrease from FY 2010, the first year of the initiative. The initiative will 

implement the most important projects for Great Lakes Restoration and achieve visible 

results. FY 2012 activities will emphasize implementation and include grants to 

35
 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

implement the Initiative by funding states, tribes and other partners. EPA expects 

substantial progress within each of the Initiative’s focus areas by focusing on the 

following actions within them: 

•	 Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern: EPA is working closely with nonFederal partners to address beneficial use impairments in areas of concern 

including Great Lakes Legacy Act clean-ups of contaminated sediments. 

•	 Invasive Species: GLRI has supported priority Asian Carp work including; 

the installation of structures by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) 

at the electric barrier site to reduce the risk of bypass by Asian carp; and Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Illinois Department of Natural Resource 

efforts to detect and remove Asian Carp from the system. As needed, GLRI 

will invest in additional efforts to keep Asian Carp from becoming established 

in the Great Lakes while continuing to address Invasive Species priorities 

such as the development of Ballast Water Treatment technologies; assistance 

to states and communities in preventing the introduction of invasive species 

and controlling existing populations; establishing early detection and rapid 

response capabilities; and the implementation of Aquatic Nuisance Species 

Management Plans by the FWS partnership. 

•	 Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source: Targeted watershed plan 

implementation will be undertaken by EPA, U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), FWS, USGS, state 

programs, and tribal governments. Additionally, GLRI funds have been 

marked for NRCS to work directly with agricultural producers in specific, high 

priority watersheds to install conservation practices on their operations to 

reduce soil erosion and non-point source nutrient loading to waters of the 

Great Lakes Basin. 

•	 Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration: GLRI funding has been 

targeted for FWS efforts to fund projects related to species and habitat 

management such as restoring wetlands, improving the hydrology of Great 

Lakes tributaries, reforesting habitats, reducing impacts of invasive species, 

and creating and/or improving corridors between habitats. Additionally, 

NRCS supports habitat restoration and protection efforts of agricultural lands 

through the programs such as the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program 

•	 Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication, and 

Partnerships: EPA’s National Coastal Condition Assessment will provide a 

framework and organization for a Comprehensive Great Lakes Coastal 

Assessment that will establish baseline conditions of environmental quality 

and variability of the near-shore waters, bottom substrate, and biota. All 

agencies will participate in the Great Lakes Accountability System where 

partner agencies will report quality controlled information regularly on GLRI 

progress in meeting the objectives and targets of this Action Plan. 

EPA expects to reach a target of 23.9 using a 40.0 scale for improving the overall 

ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by preventing water pollution and protect aquatic 

36
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

systems. Also by FY 2012, EPA expects to have removed 26 beneficial use 

impairments from AOCs within the basin. 

Chesapeake Bay: 

Increased funding for the Chesapeake Bay will support Bay watershed States as they 

implement their plans to reduce nutrient and sediment pollution in an unprecedented 

effort to restore this economically important ecosystem. President Obama’s 2009 

Executive Order (EO) tasked a team of federal agencies to draft a way forward for 

protection and restoration of the Chesapeake watershed. This team—the Federal 

Leadership Committee (FLC) for the Chesapeake Bay—is chaired by the Administrator 

of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and includes senior representatives from 

the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior and 

Transportation. 

The FLC developed the Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay 

Watershed, which was released in May 2010. Work that has taken place under the EO 

can be categorized according to the Goal Areas and Supporting Strategies identified in 

the EO Strategy, specifically around its four “Goal Areas” of work: 

•	 Restore Water Quality: Examples of efforts in this area include: EPA 

issuance of a TMDL for nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment to meet water 

quality standards; USDA development of suites of conservation practices to 

improve water quality and targeting of technical and financial assistance in 

high-priority watersheds; EPA/DOI/NOAA research and partnerships to 

address toxic pollutant contamination in the Bay 

•	 Restore Habitat: Examples of efforts in this area include: the partnership 

among USFWS, NOAA, USGS, NRCS, FHWA, and NPS to restore and 

enhance wetlands and to conduct supporting research; the partnership 

among USDA, USFS, and USFWS to restore riparian forest buffers; work by 

USFWS, NOAA, and NRCS to restore historical fish migratory routes; and 

work by Federal agencies in general, including USFWS, USGS, NOAA, EPA, 

USACE, NRCS, and USFS, to strengthen science support for habitat 

restoration 

•	 Sustain Fish and Wildlife: Examples of efforts in this area include: work by 

NOAA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to restore native 

oyster habitat and populations; NOAA’s work to rebuild the blue crab 

population target; work by USFWS, USFS, and NOAA to restore brook trout, 

black duck, and other species; NRCS’s work to support the establishment and 

protection of terrestrial habitat on private lands; the partnership among 

NOAA, USACE, USFWS, USGS, states and local organizations to strengthen 

science support to sustain fish and wildlife. 

•	 Conserve Land and Increase Public Access: Examples of efforts in this 

area include: collaboration among DOI, USDA, NOAA, DOT, DOD, states and 

local agencies on the launch of a Chesapeake Treasured Landscape 

Initiative; work by NPS, USFWS, USDA, NOAA, USGS, DOT, and HUD on 

coordinated conservation actions, watershed-wide GIS-based land 

37
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

conservation targeting system, and developing integrated transportation, land 

use, housing and water infrastructure plans for smart growth. 

The $67.4 million Chesapeake Bay program FY 2012 budget request will allow EPA to 

continue to implement the President’s Executive Order (E.O.) on Chesapeake Bay 

Protection and Restoration, to implement the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily 

Load (TMDL), to facilitate coordination of goals and activities of federal, state and local 

partners in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, to support the Chesapeake Bay 

jurisdictions in implementing the TMDL, to assist program partners in their protection 

and restoration efforts, to increase the accountability and transparency of the program, 

to continue responding to oversight reports, and to address other priority initiatives as 

they arise. 

The Chesapeake Bay TMDL, the nation’s largest and most complex TMDL, will 

necessitate significant scientific, technical, and programmatic support to states and local 

jurisdictions in developing and implementing the most appropriate programs for meeting 

their responsibilities under the TMDL allocations. EPA has engaged multiple programs 

and offices to provide the regulatory, legal, enforcement, and technical support 

necessary to meet these challenges. 

EPA is committed to its ambitious long-term goals of 100 percent attainment of 

dissolved oxygen standards in waters of the Chesapeake Bay and 185,000 acres of 

submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). Along with its federal and state partners, EPA 

has stated its intention to establish two-year milestones for all actions needed to restore 

water quality, habitats, and fish and shellfish. 

Other Geographic Programs: 

In FY 2012 EPA will continue cooperation with federal, state and Tribal governments 

and other stakeholders toward achieving the national goal of no net loss of wetlands 

under the Clean Water Action Section 404 regulatory program. The FY 2012 budget 

request for NEPs and coastal watersheds is $27.5 million to help accomplish a target of 

100,000 acres protected or restored within National Estuary Program study areas. 

After the recent catastrophe from the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, President Obama 

signed Executive Order 13554 which established the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration 

Task Force, chaired by EPA Administrator Jackson. The Task Force will serve as the 

Federal lead in Gulf Coast restoration, building off of the tremendous early efforts of the 

Working Group, the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, and others, while working to assist the 

Deepwater Horizon NRD Trustee Council. The Trustee Council will focus on restoring, 

rehabilitating, or replacing the natural resources damaged by the oil spill, while the Task 

Force and its Federal agency partners will focus their individual efforts on the broader 

suite of impacts afflicting the Gulf Coast region. The Task Force will provide a broad 

vision and strategy to guide federal cooperative efforts to address the degradation of 

this region and to reverse longstanding problems that have contributed to its decline. 

38
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

The Executive Order tasked the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force with 

developing a Gulf of Mexico Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy within one year. 

The Strategy will identify major policy areas where coordinated Federal-state action is 

necessary and will also consider existing restoration planning efforts in the region to 

identify planning gaps and restoration needs, both on a state-by-state basis and on a 

broad regional scale, setting milestones and performance indicators by which to 

measure progress of the long-term restoration effort. This strategy, combined with the 

NRD restoration plan, will likely serve to inform Federal investments in ecosystem 

restoration in the Gulf region over the next decade. EPA will provide assistance to other 

federal, state, and local partners to ensure that the water, wetlands, and beaches will be 

restored, and the surrounding communities will be revitalized. 

As a complement to the Agency’s actions in the immediate Gulf coast, EPA’s 

Mississippi River Basin program will address excessive nutrient loadings that contribute 

to water quality impairments in the basin and, ultimately, to hypoxic conditions in the 

Gulf of Mexico. Working with the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force, Gulf of Mexico Alliance and 

other states within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basins, and other federal agencies, 

EPA will help target efforts within 2-3 critical watersheds to implement effective 

strategies that can yield significant progress in addressing nonpoint source nutrient 

pollution. 

Research 

In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing 

an integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of 

individually. This approach will allow EPA to consider a broader set of issues and 

objectives while bridging traditional scientific disciplines. EPA is realigning and 

integrating the work of twelve of its base research programs into four new research 

programs (as discussed further in the Goal 1 overview and appendix): 

• Air, Climate, and Energy 

• Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 

• Sustainable and Healthy Communities 

• Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

EPA will use these integrated research programs to develop a deeper understanding of 

our environmental challenges and inform sustainable solutions to meet our strategic 

goals. In FY 2012, the Agency proposes to realign elements of the Water Quality and 

Drinking Water research programs into the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 

Research (SSWR) Program. 

Increased demands, land use practices, population growth, aging infrastructure, and 

climate variability, pose challenges to our nation's water resources. Such competing 

interests require the development of innovative new solutions for water resource 

managers and other decision makers. To address these challenges, EPA research will 

enable the following in FY 2012: 

39
 

 

 

 

Goal 2: Protecting America's Waters 

•	 Protection and restoration of watersheds to provide water quality necessary for 

sustained ecosystem health. 

•	 Treatment technologies and management strategies needed to ensure water is 

safe to drink. 

•	 Water infrastructure capable of the sustained delivery of safe water, providing for 

the removal and treatment of wastewater consistent with its sustainable and safe 

re-use, and management of stormwater in a manner that values it as a resource 

and a component of sustainable water resources. 

The new SSWR research program will address and adapt to future water resources 

management needs to ensure that natural and engineered water systems have the 

capacity and resiliency to meet current and future water needs to support the range of 

growing water-use and ecological requirements. 

Through the SSWR program, the research program is investing an additional $6.1 

million to address potential water supply endangerments associated with hydraulic 

fracturing (HF). Congress has urged EPA to conduct this research, which supports the 

Agency’s efforts to ensure the protection of our aquifers. The Agency proposes to 

conduct additional case studies on a greater number of geographic and geologic 

situations to reflect the range of conditions under which HF operates, and on HF 

practices that will help more fully characterize the factors that may lead to risks to public 

health. In addition, the Agency will develop models to assess risk to water resources 

based on geologic, geographic, hydrologic, toxicological and biogeochemical factors 

and thus support identification of situations that could be more susceptible to infiltration 

from hydraulic fracturing fluids. 

Within the SSWR program, green infrastructure research will continue to assess, 

develop, and compile scientifically rigorous tools and models that will be used by EPA’s 

Office of Water, states, and municipalities. EPA will continue to leverage the success of 

the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program, which supports innovative and 

cutting-edge research from scientists in academia through a competitive and peerreviewed grant process that is integrated with EPA’s overall research efforts. 

40
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing
 

Sustainable Development
 

Strategic Goal: Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and 

protect disproportionately impacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities. 

Prevent releases of harmful substances and clean up and restore contaminated areas. 

22.4% of Budget 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000) 

Difference 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2010 EN 

Enacted Annualized President’s to FY 2012 

Budget CR Budget PresBud 

1 - Promote Sustainable and Livable 

Communities $522,239 $520,239 $504,465 ($17,774) 

2 - Preserve Land $273,342 $273,342 $264,903 ($8,439) 

3 - Restore Land $1,198,660 $1,198,660 $1,133,624 ($65,035) 

4 - Strengthen Human Health and 

Environmental Protection in Indian 

Country $80,827 $80,827 $114,069 $33,243 

Goal 3 Total $2,075,067 $2,073,067 $2,017,062 ($58,005) 

Workyears 4,484 4,484 4,338 (146) 

NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations. 

FY 2012 President’s Budget totals exclude a $50 million cancellation, which will impact Goal 3. 

Introduction 

Land is one of America’s most valuable resources and EPA strives to clean up 

communities to create a safer environment for all Americans. Hazardous and nonhazardous wastes on the land can migrate to the air, groundwater and surface water, 

contaminating drinking water supplies, causing acute illnesses or chronic diseases, and 

threatening healthy ecosystems in urban, rural, and suburban areas. EPA will continue 

efforts to prevent and reduce the risks posed by releases of harmful substances to land; 

to clean up communities; to strengthen state and Tribal partnerships; and to expand the 

conversation on environmentalism and work for environmental justice. The Agency also 

will work to advance sustainable development and to protect disproportionately 

41
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

impacted low-income, minority, and Tribal communities through outreach and protection 

efforts for communities historically underrepresented in EPA decision-making. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to work collaboratively with state and Tribal partners to 

prevent and reduce exposure to contaminants. Improved compliance at high risk oil and 

chemical facilities through rulemaking and increased inspections will help prevent 

exposure by encouraging compliance with environmental regulations. This is another 

focus of the FY 2012 investments. In order to address exposures to releases that have 

already occurred and/or will occur in the future, EPA will continue implement the 

Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) program. The purpose of ICI is to coordinate the 

relevant tools available in each of the clean-up programs in order to accelerate the pace 

of cleanups in the most effective and efficient manner to appropriately service 

communities. These efforts will be supported by sound scientific data, research, and 

cost-effective tools that alert EPA to emerging issues and inform Agency decisions on 

managing materials and addressing contaminated properties. 

Improving a community’s ability to make decisions that affect its environment is at the 

heart of EPA’s community-centered work. Challenging and complex environmental 

problems, such as contaminated soil, sediment, and groundwater that can cause human 

health concerns, persist at many contaminated properties. The burden of a single 

blighted and contaminated site, or multiple blighted and contaminated sites 

concentrated within an area, can weigh down an entire community. Oftentimes, there is 

no obvious reuse for a contaminated property and communities struggle with what will 

happen at the site. This dilemma results in long-term environmental and economic 

community distress. As multiple sites are often connected through infrastructure and 

geographic location, approaching the assessment and cleanup needs of the entire area 

can be more effective than focusing on individual sites in isolation of the surrounding 

area. 

Many communities across the country regularly face risks posed by intentional and 

accidental releases of harmful substances into the environment. EPA and its state 

partners issue, update, or maintain RCRA permits for approximately 2,500 hazardous 

waste facilities. In addition, there are over 1,627 sites total on NPL nationwide. 

Contaminants at these hazardous waste sites are often complex chemical mixtures 

affecting multiple environmental media. In other words, operations at a site may have 

contaminated groundwater, surface water, and soil, at times also impacting indoor and 

outdoor air quality. The precise impact of many contaminant mixtures on human health 

remains uncertain; however, substances commonly found at Superfund sites have been 

linked to a variety of human health problems, such as birth defects, infertility, cancer, 

and changes in neurobehavioral functions. In FY 2012, EPA will continue its work to 

cleanup, redevelop, and revitalize contaminated sites. 

There is a critical need for the Agency to increase its capacity to prevent and respond to 

accidental releases of harmful substances, including oil spills, by developing clear 

authorities, training personnel, and providing proper equipment. Recent spills and 

releases at oil and chemical facilities have resulted in human injuries and deaths, 

42
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

severe environmental damage, and great financial loss. The BP Deepwater Horizon 

(DWH) oil spill disaster resulted in 11 deaths, millions of gallons of spilled oil, and untold 

environmental damage. Likewise, accidents reported to EPA by the current universe of 

Risk Management Program (RMP) facilities have resulted in over 40 worker deaths, 

nearly 1,500 worker injuries, more than 300,000 people sheltered in place, and more 

than $1 billion in on-site and off-site damages. EPA will increase its capacity for 

compliance monitoring and inspections at these facilities in FY 2012. 

Major FY 2012 Investment Areas 

Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in High Risk Oil and Chemical 

Facilities 

The Oil Spill program helps protect U.S. waters by effectively preventing, preparing for, 

responding to, and monitoring oil spills. EPA also works with state and local partners 

through the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness Program to help protect the 

public and the environment from catastrophic releases of hazardous substances that 

occur at chemical facilities. EPA currently conducts over 550 inspections at chemical 

facilities per year (approximately 5 percent of the universe of RMP facilities in nondelegated states) and 1,100 SPCC inspections and 250 FRP inspections and drills at 

oil facilities per year (0.2 percent of the universe of 640,000 SPCC facilities, 6 percent at 

FRP facilities). In FY 2012, the Agency will expand its current prevention activities at 

high risk oil and chemical facilities by investing $1 million and 5 FTE to increase 

oversight of high risk chemical facilities; $5.1 million and 16 FTE to increase inspections 

of high risk oil facilities; and $1.4 million and 1 FTE to improve compliance and develop 

a new database as part of leveraging technology to enhance EPA’s compliance efforts 

under the Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas initiative. 

Support for Tribes 

As the largest single source of EPA funding to tribes, the Tribal General Assistance 

Program (GAP) provides grants to build capacity to administer environmental programs 

that may be authorized by EPA in Indian country. These grants provide technical 

assistance in the development of programs to address environmental issues on Indian 

lands. An $8.5 million increase to funding for GAP grants will build tribal capacity and 

assists tribes in leveraging other EPA and federal funding to contribute towards a higher 

overall level of environmental and human health protection. 

Many tribes have expressed the need to start implementing high priority environmental 

programs, but GAP funding may only be used for capacity building. Increasing GAP 

grant funding will allow tribes to continue to develop stronger, more sustainable 

environmental programs, while allowing more tribes to take advantage of the new multimedia tribal implementation program. The $20 million investment in a new multi-media 

tribal implementation grant program will support tribes in addressing individual tribe’s 

most serious environmental needs through the implementation of environmental 

programs and projects, an ongoing top priority for both tribes and the Agency. 

43
 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions 

In order to promote fiscal responsibility EPA is also making the tough choices, including: 

•	 Reducing FTE and funding for waste minimization activities as the program is 

redirected to sustainable materials management and existing efforts aimed at 

promoting the reduction, reuse and recycling of municipal solid waste and industrial 

materials are discontinued or scaled back. 

•	 Reducing resources devoted to Regional response activities under the Superfund 

Emergency Response and Removal program, continuing to focus on encouraging 

PRPs to conduct removal actions and looking for ways to find efficiencies and lessen 

the impact of the reduction. 

•	 Reducing Federal Facilities and Restoration Program work at non-NPL sites cleaned 

up by other federal agencies and focusing efforts on meeting statutory oversight 

responsibilities at federal NPL sites. 

•	 Reducing Superfund remedial construction funding which may have the effect of 

postponing new remedial construction starts, slowing down the pace of ongoing 

construction projects, and delaying certain site assessment and characterization 

projects. EPA is exploring program efficiencies that may be achieved to limit the 

impact of this reduction. 

•	 Decreasing funding for the Agency's homeland security response and preparedness 

program while maintaining the current level of preparedness. 

Priority Goal 

EPA has established a Priority Goal to highlight progress made under the Brownfields 

Area-Wide Planning Pilot Program. The Priority Goal is: 

•	 By 2012 EPA will have initiated 20 enhanced Brownfields community level projects 

that will include a new area-wide planning effort to benefit under-served and 

economically disadvantaged communities. This will allow those communities to 

assess and address a single large or multiple Brownfields sites within their 

boundaries, thereby advancing area-wide planning to enable redevelopment of 

Brownfields properties on a broader scale. EPA will provide technical assistance, 

coordinate its enforcement, water and air quality programs, and work with other 

Federal agencies, states, tribes and local governments to implement associated 

targeted environmental improvements identified in each community’s area-wide 

plan. 

EPA awarded Brownfields Area-Wide Planning assistance to 23 pilot communities in FY 

2011. Consistent with EPA’s Priority Goal commitment, throughout FY 2012 the 23 pilot 

44
 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

communities will continue to use the grant and/or direct contract assistance they 

received from EPA to initiate development of a brownfields area-wide plan and 

determine the next steps and resources needed to implement the plan. In FY 2012, 

EPA will continue to track progress towards its priority goals and will update goals as 

necessary and appropriate. 

FY 2012 Activities 

Work under this Goal supports 4 objectives: 1) Promote Sustainable and Livable 

Communities, 2) Preserve Land; 3) Restore Land; and 4) Strengthen Human Health and 

Environmental Protection in Indian Country. It is also supported by science and 

research to enhance and strengthen these objectives. 

Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to use several approaches to promote sustainable, 

healthier communities and protect vulnerable populations and disproportionately 

impacted low-income, minority, and tribal communities. The Agency especially is 

concerned about threats to sensitive populations, such as children, the elderly, and 

individuals with chronic diseases. 

Brownfields : 

EPA’s Brownfields program supports states, local communities, and Tribes in their 

efforts to assess and clean up potentially contaminated and lightly contaminated sites 

within their jurisdiction. This support includes emphasis and participation in 

Administration-wide initiatives such as the America’s Great Outdoors (AGO) initiative 

(promoting urban parks and greenways) and the Partnership for Sustainable 

Communities (supporting area-wide planning for sustainable redevelopment). EPA will 

provide technical assistance for Brownfields redevelopment in cities in transition which 

are areas struggling with high unemployment as a result of structural changes to their 

economies. In addition, the Brownfields program works closely with EPA’s Smart 

Growth program to address critical issues for Brownfields redevelopment, including land 

assembly, development permitting issues, financing, parking and street standards, 

accountability to uniform systems of information for land use controls, and other factors 

that influence the economic viability of Brownfields redevelopment. The best practices, 

tools, and lessons learned from the smart growth program will directly inform and assist 

EPA’s efforts to increase area-wide planning for assessment, cleanup, and 

redevelopment of Brownfields sites. 

Smart Growth : 

The Agency’s Smart Growth Program works across and within EPA and other federal 

agencies to help communities grow in ways that strengthen their economies, protect the 

environment, and preserve their heritage. This program focuses on streamlining, 

concentrating, and leveraging state and federal assistance in places with the greatest 

need. By concentrating and leveraging federal and state resources in areas with 

specific needs, EPA hopes to create an inviting atmosphere for economic development 

45
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

on which urban, suburban, and rural communities can capitalize. In FY 2012, EPA will 

continue its strong support for the Federal DOT, HUD, and EPA Partnership for 

Sustainable Communities, promote smart growth, and provide green building technical 

assistance to states and local communities. EPA will also continue to develop 

additional tools to best assist communities, particularly those that are disadvantaged or 

have been adversely impacted by contamination and environmental degradation, in 

implementing sustainable community strategies and approaches. 

Environmental Justice : 

EPA is committed to ensuring environmental justice regardless of race, color, national 

origin, or income. Recognizing that minority and/or low-income communities frequently 

may be exposed disproportionately to environmental harm and risks, the Agency works 

to protect these communities from adverse health and environmental effects and to 

ensure they are given the opportunity to participate meaningfully in environmental 

decisions, including clean-ups. In FY 2012, EPA’s Environmental Justice (EJ) program 

will intensify its efforts to incorporate environmental justice considerations in the 

rulemaking process. An ongoing challenge for EPA has been to develop rules that 

implement existing statutory authority while working to reduce disproportionate 

exposure and impacts from multiple sources. In FY 2012, the EJ program will work to 

apply effective methods suitable for decision-making involving disproportionate 

environmental health impacts on minority, low-income, and Tribal populations. EPA is 

also working on technical guidance to support the integration of EJ considerations in 

analysis that support EPA’s actions. 

Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE): 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue its successful and innovative Community Action for a 

Renewed Environment (CARE) program to assist distressed communities in addressing 

critical human health and environmental risks. Since its launch in 2005, the CARE 

program has awarded 91 grants to communities across 39 states to address key 

environmental priorities and achieved results in predominantly environmental justice 

communities. Since CARE is a multi-media program, projects often address more than 

one medium. To date, Fifty percent of the grants have addressed air pollution; 50 

percent chemical safety; 30 percent cleanup of contaminated lands; 30 percent water 

issues; and 25 percent climate change. With the FY 2012 funding, the CARE program 

will reach approximately 10 new communities. EPA will provide technical support for 

underserved and other communities, help them use collaborative processes to select 

and implement local actions, and award federal funding for projects to reduce exposure 

to pollutants and local environmental problems. Under this program, EPA will create – 

and in several Regions pilot – a Partners Program to provide technical support and 

access to EPA programs while outside organizations provide funding to the community. 

The Partners Program will provide the opportunity to leverage EPA’s investment and 

allow CARE to reach more communities than EPA could with increased grant funding 

alone. 

46
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

U.S.-Mexico Border : 

The U.S.-Mexico Border region hosts a growing population of more than 14.6 million 

people, posing unique drinking water and wastewater infrastructure shortages. In 

addition, 432 thousand of the over 14 million people in the region live in 1,200 colonias 1 

which are unincorporated communities characterized by substandard housing and 

unsafe drinking water. The Border 2012 framework agreement is intended to protect 

the environment and public health along the U.S.-Mexico Border region, consistent with 

the principles of sustainable development. The key areas of focus for EPA’s Border 

2012 Program continue to include: 1) increasing access to drinking water and 

wastewater infrastructure; 2) building greenhouse gas (GHG) information capacity and 

expanding voluntary energy efficiency reduction programs to achieve GHG reduction; 3) 

developing institutional capacity to manage municipal solid waste; 4) piloting projects 

that reduce exposure to pesticides; 5) conducting bi-national emergency preparedness 

training and exercises at sister cities; and 6) continuing to test and update the 

emergency notification mechanism between Mexico and the United States. In addition, 

in FY 2012, EPA also will focus its efforts towards the development of the next 

generation of the Border program. 

Preserve and Restore Land 

EPA leads the country’s activities to prevent and reduce the risks posed by releases of 

harmful substances and to preserve and restore land with effective waste management 

and cleanup methods. In FY 2012, the Agency is requesting $1.4 billion to continue to 

apply the most effective approach to preserve and restore land by developing and 

implementing prevention programs, improving response capabilities, and maximizing 

the effectiveness of response and cleanup actions. This approach will help ensure that 

human health and the environment are protected and that land is returned to beneficial 

use. 

In FY 2012, EPA also will continue to use a hierarchy of approaches to protect the land: 

reducing waste at its source, recycling waste, managing waste effectively by preventing 

spills and releases of toxic materials, and cleaning up contaminated properties. The 

Agency especially is concerned about threats to sensitive populations, such as children, 

the elderly, and individuals with chronic diseases, and prioritizes cleanups accordingly.2 

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA, or Superfund) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

provide legal authority for EPA’s work to protect the land. The Agency and its partners 

use Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites, 

allowing land to be returned to productive use. Under RCRA, EPA works in partnership 

with states and tribes to address risks associated with leaking underground storage 

tanks and to manage solid and hazardous waste. 

1 http://www.borderhealth.org/border_region.php
 2 Additional information on these programs can be found at: www.epa.gov/superfund, 

http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/er_cleanup.htm, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ca/, 

http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/, http://www.epa.gov/swerust1/, http://www.epa.gov/swerffrr/ and 

http://www.epa.gov/swerrims/landrevitalization.
 

47
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

In FY 2012, EPA will work to preserve and restore the nation’s land by ensuring proper 

management of waste and petroleum products, reducing waste generation, increasing 

recycling and by strengthening its cleanup programs and oversight of oil and chemical 

facilities. These efforts are integrated with the Agency’s efforts to promote sustainable 

and livable communities. EPA’s land program activities for FY 2012 include seven 

broad efforts: 1) Integrated Cleanup Initiative; 2) Land Cleanup and Revitalization; 3) 

RCRA Waste Management and Corrective Action; 4) Recycling and Waste 

Minimization; 5) Underground Storage Tanks management; 6) Oil Spills and Chemical 

Safety, and 7) Homeland Security. 

Integrated Cleanup Initiative: 

In an effort to improve the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of EPA’s 

cleanup programs, EPA initiated the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI), a multi-year 

effort to better use the most appropriate assessment and cleanup authorities to address 

a greater number of sites, accelerate cleanups, and put those sites back into productive 

use while protecting human health and the environment. By bringing to bear the 

relevant tools available in each of the cleanup programs, including enforcement, EPA 

will better leverage the resources available to address needs at individual sites. In FY 

2012, EPA will continue to examine all aspects of the cleanup programs, identifying key 

process improvements and enhanced efficiencies. In addition, in order to better 

measure the performance and progress made in advancing cleanups and addressing 

potentially contaminated sites, EPA developed two new performance measures under 

ICI that will support comprehensive management of the cleanup life cycle: Site 

Assessments (to track all of the sites for which EPA performs an assessment of 

environmental condition) and Remedial Action Project Completions (to track the 

progress in completing phases of constructing the remedy at Superfund sites). When 

added to the existing suite of performance measures, EPA’s measures now address 

three critical points in the cleanup process—starting, advancing, and completing site 

cleanup. 

EPA also will implement its Community Engagement Initiative designed to enhance 

involvement with local communities and stakeholders so that they may meaningfully 

participate in decisions on land cleanup, emergency response, and management of 

hazardous substances and waste. The goals of this initiative are to ensure transparent 

and accessible decision-making processes, deliver information that communities can 

use to participate meaningfully, and help EPA produce outcomes that are more 

responsive to community perspectives and that ensure timely cleanup decisions. 

Land Cleanup and Revitalization : 

In addition to promoting sustainable and livable communities, EPA’s cleanup programs 

(e.g., Superfund Remedial, Superfund Federal Facilities Response, Superfund 

Emergency Response and Removal, RCRA Corrective Action, Brownfields, and 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) Cooperative Agreements) and their 

partners are taking proactive steps to facilitate the cleanup and revitalization of 

contaminated properties. In FY 2012, the Agency will continue to help communities 

48
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

clean up and revitalize these once productive properties by removing contamination, 

helping limit urban sprawl, fostering ecologic habitat enhancements, enabling economic 

development, taking advantage of existing infrastructure, and maintaining or improving 

quality of life. In addition, EPA will continue to support the RE-Powering America’s 

Land initiative3 in partnership with the Department of Energy. These projects advance 

cleaner and more cost effective energy technologies, and reduce the environmental 

impacts of energy systems. 

RCRA Waste Management and Corrective Action: 

In FY 2012, the Agency will continue to work in partnership with the states to coordinate 

RCRA program goals and direction. EPA will continue to assist states in permit 

development, permit renewals, or other approved controls at facilities that treat, store, or 

dispose of hazardous waste. EPA will work to meet its annual target of implementing 

initial approved or updated controls at 100 RCRA hazardous waste management 

facilities. In addition to meeting these goals, the program is responsible for the 

continued maintenance of the regulatory controls at approximately 2,500 facilities in the 

permitting baseline. 4 

EPA’s RCRA Corrective Action program will focus on site investigation, identification of
 

interim remedies to eliminate exposures to human health or the environment, and
 

selection of safe, effective long-term remedies. Sites will see the results of this funding
 

in FY 2012 and beyond, as the number of sites achieving the Agency’s environmental
 

indicators including control of human exposures and migration of contaminated 

groundwater increase over time.
 

Recycling and Waste Minimization : 

In FY 2012, EPA will complete this program’s redirection to sustainable materials
 

management. This redirection is a significant step that will allow EPA to consider the
 

human health and environmental impacts associated with the full lifecycle of materials—
 

from the amount and toxicity of raw materials extraction, through transportation,
 

processing, manufacturing, and use, as well as re-use, recycling and disposal.
 

The EPAct and Underground Storage Tanks : 

The EPAct 5 contains numerous provisions that significantly affect federal and state 

underground storage tank (UST) programs and requires that EPA and states strengthen 

tank release and prevention programs. In FY 2012, EPA will provide assistance to 

states to help them meet their EPAct responsibilities, which include: 1) mandatory 

inspections every three years for all underground storage tanks and enforcement of 

violations discovered during the inspections; 2) operator training; 3) prohibition of 

3 Additional information on this initiative can be found on http://www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland/. 4 The permitting baseline universe currently has 2,446 facilities with approximately 10,000 process unit groups. 5 For more information, refer to http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgibin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ058.109.pdf (scroll to Title XV - Ethanol And Motor 

Fuels, Subtitle B – Underground Storage Tank Compliance, on pages 500-513 of the pdf file). 

49
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

delivery for non-complying facilities6; and 4) secondary containment or financial 

responsibility for tank manufacturers and installers. 

Additionally, there are an unknown number of petroleum Brownfields sites that are 

predominately old gas stations that blight the environmental and economic health of 

surrounding neighborhoods. In FY 2012, EPA’s UST and Brownfields program will 

continue to jointly focus attention and resources on the cleanup and reuse of petroleumcontaminated sites. 

Oil Spills and Chemical Safety : 

The Oil Spill program helps protect U.S. waters by effectively preventing, preparing for, 

responding to, and monitoring oil spills. EPA conducts oil spill prevention, 

preparedness, and enforcement activities associated with the 640,000 nontransportation-related oil storage facilities that EPA regulates through its Spill 

Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) program. EPA currently conducts 

approximately 1,100 inspections per year at SPCC-regulated facilities (representing 0.2 

percent of the total universe of 640,000) and 250 FRP inspections and drills at 6 percent 

of the FRP facilities. In FY 2012, as part of the Oil Spill investments, the Agency will 

broaden and expand its prevention and preparedness activities. 

In addition to its prevention responsibilities, EPA serves as the lead responder for
 

cleanup of all inland zone spills, including transportation-related spills from pipelines,
 

trucks, and other transportation systems and provides technical assistance and support
 

to the U.S. Coast Guard for coastal and maritime oil spills. In FY 2012, EPA will
 

continue to review and revise, as appropriate, the National Oil and Hazardous
 

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, including Subpart J which regulates the use of
 

dispersants and other chemicals as a tool in oil spill response.
 

EPA also works with state and local partners to help protect the public and the
 

environment from catastrophic releases of hazardous substances at chemical handling
 

facilities through the State and Local Prevention and Preparedness program. Under the
 

Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA regulations require that facilities handling more than a
 

threshold quantity of certain extremely hazardous substances must implement a risk
 

management program and submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP) to EPA among
 

others entities. Facilities are required to update their RMP at least once every five years 

and sooner if changes are made at the facility. EPA currently conducts over 550
 

inspections or unannounced exercises per year (approximately 5 percent of the
 

universe of 13,100 RMP facilities in non-delegated states), including over 140 at high
 

risk facilities. In FY 2012, through the Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in
 

Critical Areas investment, the Agency will expand its current activities.
 

Homeland Security : 

EPA’s Homeland Security work is an important component of the Agency’s prevention,
 

protection, and response activities. EPA will continue to provide Homeland Security
 

6 Refer to Grant Guidelines to States for Implementing the Delivery Prohibition Provision of the Energy Policy Act of 

2005, August 2006, EPA-510-R-06-003, http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/epact_05.htm#Final. 

50
 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

emergency preparedness and response capability. In FY 2012, the Agency requests 

$38.7 million to: maintain its capability to respond effectively to incidents that may 

involve harmful chemical, biological, and radiological substances; operate the 

Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN); maximize the effectiveness of its 

involvement in national security events through pre-deployments of assets such as 

emergency response personnel and field detection equipment; maintain the Emergency 

Management Portal (EMP); and manage, collect, and validate new information for new 

and existing weapons of mass destruction agents as decontamination techniques are 

developed or as other information emerges from the scientific community. 

Improve Human Health and the Environment in Indian Country 

In FY 2012, EPA will assist Federally-recognized tribes in assessing environmental 

conditions in Indian country, and will help build their capacity to implement 

environmental programs though the $8.5 million investment in funding for the Tribal 

GAP program. EPA will also strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting 

environmental policies and decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, and 

environmental stewardship in Indian country through continued collaboration with 

Agency program offices as well as through EPA's Tribal Science Council. 

Since adopting the EPA Indian Policy in 1984, EPA has worked with federallyrecognized tribes on a government-to-government basis, in recognition of the federal 

government's trust responsibility to federally-recognized tribes. Under federal 

environmental statutes, the Agency is responsible for protecting human health and the 

environment in Indian country. In FY 2012, EPA’s Office of International and Tribal 

Affairs (OITA) will continue to lead an Agency-wide effort to work with tribes, Alaska 

Native Villages, and inter-tribal consortia to fulfill this responsibility. EPA’s strategy for 

achieving this objective has three major components: 

•	 Establish an Environmental Presence in Indian Country: The Agency will 

continue to provide funding through the Indian General Assistance Program (GAP) 

so each federally-recognized tribe can establish an environmental presence. 

•	 Provide Access to Environmental Information: EPA will provide the information 

tribes need to meet EPA and Tribal environmental priorities, as well as characterize 

the environmental and public health improvements that result from joint actions. 

•	 Implementation of Environmental Goals: The Agency will provide opportunities 

for the implementation of Tribal environmental programs by tribes, or directly by 

EPA, as necessary through 1) media-specific programs, 2) tribes themselves, or 

3) directly by EPA if necessary. 

Additionally, in FY 2012, EPA is investing in the multi-media Tribal implementation grant 

program which allows the Agency to build upon the successful capacity-building work of 

the GAP program through full program implementation. 

51
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

Research 

In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing 

an integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of 

individually. EPA is realigning and integrating the work of its base research programs 

into four new research programs (further described in the Goal 1 overview and 

appendix) The new Sustainable and Healthy Communities (SHC) research program 

will focus on the integration, translation and coordinated communication of research on 

sustainability, land use, protection and restoration, human health, ecological risk 

assessment modeling, and ecosystem services. The SHC research program will 

provide innovative and creative management approaches and decision support tools for 

communities, regions, states and tribes to protect and ensure a sustainable balance 

between human health and the environment. 

Communities are increasingly challenged to improve and protect the health and wellbeing of their residents and the ecosystem services upon which they depend, in the 

face of increasing resource demands and changing demographics, economic, social, 

and climate patterns. Research will be conducted in broad areas, which will support the 

many aspects of community health described above: 

I.	 Research to Address Specific Community Needs and Improve Our Understanding 

of Community Sustainability: 

As specific research questions are formulated in the areas of human health, 

ecosystems and ecosystem services, land and waste management, innovative 

technologies and life cycle analysis, EPA will begin conducting pilot projects that 

explore and address problems in an integrated manner by focusing specifically on 

1) an urban community, 2)multiple communities in the Gulf of Mexico region, 

and3) certain high-priority problems facing communities across the nation. 

II. Decision Analysis and Support for Conducting Integrated Assessments: 

While communities often have creative and well-trained government staff, NGOs, 

and citizen groups, they usually do not have the capacity to rapidly develop and/or 

customize advanced decision tools and supporting data sets that will enable 

effective, real-time community investment decisions. This research will focus on 

developing practical decision support tools and analytic methods that enable 

communities to effectively use information developed by the SHC research 

program and other programs to support community decision making related to 

environmental sustainability. 

III.	 Superfund: 

The SHC research program will focus on innovative remediation options for 

contaminated sediments and the development of new alternatives to dredging. In 

addition, the program will develop solutions to contaminated ground water by 

evaluating subsurface and above-ground alternatives to pump-and-treat, 

particularly for recalcitrant contaminants such as chlorinated solvents and other 

contaminants that do not dissolve easily in water, and will evaluate chemical 

52
 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development 

oxidation and permeable reactive barriers, including those using nanoscale 

materials. The SHC research program will continue to provide technical support 

and technology transfer to support ground water modeling needs in communities. 

IV.	 Oil Spill Research: 

In FY 2012, the SHC program will focus on two areas related to oil spill research: 

1) EPA will develop protocols to revise or test oil spill control agents or products 

for listing on the National Contingency Plan (NCP) Product Schedule and other 

activities deemed necessary by EPA’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM), 

and 2) the Agency will conduct studies on the effectiveness of bioremediation for 

freshly spilled oil and aged residuals of petroleum-based oil, biodiesel, and 

biodiesel blends, and the performance of dispersants for deep water applications. 

EPA also conducts research supporting Goal 3 through its Science to Achieve Results 

(STAR) program, which leverages innovative and cutting-edge research from scientists 

in academia through a competitive and peer-reviewed grant process that is integrated 

with EPA’s overall research efforts. The Agency is enhancing its investment in areas 

critical to support the Administration’s science priorities, including strengthening the 

future scientific workforce through investment in fellowships to students in pursuit of 

careers and advanced degrees in environmental science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics. In FY 2012, EPA will provide $14 million for STAR Fellowships, including 

support for an estimated 243 continuing fellows and 105 new STAR fellows. 

53
54
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing
 

Pollution
 

Strategic Goal: Reduce the risk and increase the safety of chemicals and prevent 

pollution at the source. 

7.8% of Budget 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000) 

Difference 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2010 EN 

Enacted Annualized President’s to FY 2012 

Budget CR Budget PresBud 

1 - Ensure Chemical Safety $618,182 $618,182 $642,722 $24,539 

2 - Promote Pollution Prevention $62,945 $62,945 $59,821 ($3,124) 

Goal 4 Total $681,127 $681,127 $702,542 $21,416 

Workyears 2,693 2,693 2,706 14 

NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations. 

Introduction 

Chemicals have become ubiquitous in our everyday lives and products, because they 

are used in the production of everything from our homes and cars to the cell phones we 

carry and the food we eat. Chemicals are often released into the environment as a 

result of their manufacture, processing, use, and disposal. Research shows that 

children are getting steady infusions of industrial chemicals before they even are given 

solid food1,2,3

. Other vulnerable groups, including low-income, minority, and indigenous 

populations, may also be disproportionately impacted by and thus particularly at risk 

from chemical exposure4,5,6. While TSCA authorizes review of new chemicals before 

1 The Disproportionate Impact of Environmental Health Threats on Children of Color 

(http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/8d49f7ad4bbcf4ef852573590040b7f6/79a3f13c301688828525770c0063b 

277!OpenDocument) 2 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks 3 Guide to Considering Children's Health When Developing EPA Actions: Implementing Executive Order 13045 and 

EPA's Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children 

(http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/ADPguide.htm/$File/EPA_ADP_Guide_508.pdf) 4 Holistic Risk-based Environmental Decision Making: a Native Perspective 

(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241171) 

55
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

they enter the market and provides authority for EPA to mandate industry to conduct 

testing, there remain gaps in the available use and exposure data and state of 

knowledge on many widely used chemicals in commerce. EPA programs work to 

ensure chemical safety, including pesticides, and to manage the chemicals already in 

the environment that may have adverse affects. EPA is also promoting sustainable, 

lower risk processes and working with communities to improve overall environmental 

quality. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to make substantial progress in transitioning from an 

approach dominated by voluntary data submissions by industry, to a more aggressive 

action-oriented approach to ensure chemical safety through four areas of focus: 1) 

using all available authorities under TSCA to take immediate and lasting action to 

eliminate or reduce identified chemical risks and develop proven safer alternatives; 2) 

using regulatory mechanisms to fill remaining gaps in critical exposure data, and 

increasing transparency and public access to information on TSCA chemicals; 3) using 

data from all available sources to conduct detailed chemical risk assessments on 

priority chemicals to inform the need for and support development and implementation 

of risk management actions; and 4) prevent introduction of unsafe new chemicals into 

commerce. 

EPA’s Pesticide Licensing program screens new pesticides before they reach the 

market and ensures that pesticides already in commerce are safe when used in 

accordance with the label. As directed by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and the 

Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), EPA is responsible for registering pesticides to 

protect consumers, pesticide users, workers who may be exposed to pesticides, 

children, and other sensitive populations. EPA also reviews potential impacts on the 

environment, with particular attention to endangered species. 

In 1990, the Pollution Prevention Act established preventing pollution before it is 

generated as national environmental policy. EPA is enhancing cross-cutting efforts to 

advance sustainable practices, safer chemicals and sustainable lower risk processes 

and practices, and safer products. The combined effect of community level actions, 

geographically targeted investments, attention to chemicals, and concern for 

ecosystems, implemented through the lens of science, transparency and law, will bring 

real improvements and protections. 

Achieving an environmentally sustainable future demands that EPA make smarter, 

faster decisions guided by sound science on environmental problems facing the country 

today. It is also crucial to anticipate tomorrow’s problems and identify approaches to 

better inform environmentally sustainable behavior. The EPA Science Advisory Board 

5 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income 

Populations

6 Interim Guidance on Considering Environmental Justice During the Development of an Action 

(http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/resources/policy/considering-ej-in-rulemaking-guide-07-2010.pdf) 

56
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

has recognized7 that the improved understanding of today’s environmental problems 

requires an integrative, transdisciplinary approach that considers multi-media, 

integrated, and non-traditional approaches to achieve more effective and efficient 

solutions. EPA’s research request reflects the necessity to increase synergies among 

programs using systems thinking and catalytic innovation in order to meet the problems 

of the 21st century. 

Major FY 2012 Investment Areas 

Enhancing Chemical Safety 

EPA will invest an additional $16 million and 5.5 FTE to continue implementing its 

enhanced chemical management strategy to make long-overdue progress in ensuring 

the safety of existing chemicals: 1) obtaining, managing and making public chemical 

information; 2) screening and assessing chemical risks; and 3) managing chemical 

risks. In FY 2012, EPA’s approach will be centered on immediate and lasting actions to 

identify and mitigate unreasonable chemical risks and develop proven safer alternatives 

to hazardous chemicals. 

The FY 2012 investment will provide for action needed to 1) increase the Agency’s pace 

in obtaining and making public TSCA chemical health and safety and other information; 

2) conduct detailed chemical risk assessments on priority chemicals and accelerating 

progress in characterizing the hazards posed by HPV chemicals 3) undertake 

appropriate risk management actions on chemicals identified as posing significant 

human health or environmental risks. 

Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions 

•	 Funding reductions reflect expected program efficiencies and reprioritization of 

targeted activities. Specifically, EPA will reduce support for non-regulatory activities 

including pollinator protection, urban pest management and the Pesticide 

Environmental Stewardship Program. Funding reductions may also delay 

development and implementation of some risk assessment policies. 

FY 2012 Activities 

Toxics Programs 

FY 2012 represents a crucial stage in EPA’s approach for ensuring chemical safety. 

The program has attained its ‘zero tolerance’ goal in preventing introduction of unsafe 

new chemicals into commerce but many existing (‘pre-TSCA’) chemicals already in 

commerce remain un-assessed. The Existing Chemicals can be split into three major 

component activities: 1) strengthening chemical information collection, management, 

7 http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/E989ECFC125966428525775B0047BE1A/$File/EPA-SAB-10-010­

unsigned.pdf 

57
 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

and transparency ($14.7M); 2) Screening and Assessing Chemical Risks ($15.6M); and 

3) Reducing Chemical Risks ($26.4M). 

Also in FY 2012, EPA will continue to prevent the entry of new chemicals into the US 

market which pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. The major 

activity of the New Chemicals program ($14.3M) is PMN review and management, 

which addresses the potential risks from approximately 1,100 chemicals, products of 

biotechnology and new chemical nanoscale materials received annually prior to their 

entry into the US marketplace. 

In FY 2012, the Agency will continue to implement the Chemicals Risk Management 

program to further eliminate risks from high-risk “legacy” chemicals, such as 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury. The Lead program will continue efforts 

to further reduce childhood blood lead incidence, and will continue implementing the 

Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule though increased outreach efforts 

and targeted activities to support renovator certifications. EPA will allocate $35.3 million 

to undertaking existing chemical risk management actions in FY 2012. 

Pesticides Programs 

A key component of chemical safety and to protecting the health of people, 

communities, and ecosystems, is identifying, assessing, and reducing the risks 

presented by the pesticides on which our society and economy depend. EPA will 

continue to manage a comprehensive pesticide risk reduction program through sciencebased registration and reevaluation processes, a worker safety program, and support 

for integrated pest management. The pesticide review processes will continue to 

increasingly focus on improving pesticide registrations compliance with the Endangered 

Species Act and achieve broader Agency objectives for water quality protection. 

58
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

EPA will continue to place emphasis on the protection of potentially sensitive groups, 

such as children, by reducing exposures from pesticides used in and around homes, 

schools, and other public areas. In addition, the Agency worker protection, certification, 

and training regulations will encourage safe application practices. Together, these 

programs minimize exposure to pesticides, maintain a safe and affordable food supply, 

address public health issues, and minimize property damage that can occur from 

insects and pests. As part of the Agency’s review of non-regulatory efforts, the 

Strategic Agriculture Initiative program will shift its emphasis to the Integrated Pest 

Management (IPM) program, providing a more focused effort in IPM to address a wide 

range of agricultural risk issues in food safety as well as minimizing exposure from 

pesticide drift. 

Chemical and biological pesticides help meet national and global demands for food. 

They provide effective pest control for homes, schools, gardens, highways, utility lines, 

hospitals, and drinking water treatment facilities and control animal vectors of disease. 

Many regulatory actions involve reduced risk pesticides which, once registered, will 

result in increased societal benefits. In addition to collecting a total of $82 million in 

anticipated fee-funded activities in FY 2012, $32 million which can be obligated EPA is 

funding $128.7 million in Pesticides Licensing programs. 

Pollution Prevention 

EPA will continue to promote innovation through environmental stewardship strategies 

that promote economic revitalization. EPA will draw on innovative and cross media 

strategies to focus analysis and coordination across the Agency, with States, and with 

other Federal agencies. 

In FY 2012, EPA’s Pollution Prevention (P2) programs will target technical assistance, 

information and supporting assessments to encourage the use of greener chemicals, 

technologies, processes, and products through programs with proven records of 

success such as: Green Suppliers Network, Regional Grants, Pollution Prevention 

Resource Exchange, Partnership for Sustainable Healthcare, Green Chemistry and 

Green Engineering. In addition, EPA’s P2 programs will continue to support the new 

Economy, Energy and Environment (E3) partnership among federal agencies, local 

governments and manufacturers to promote energy efficiency, job creation and 

environmental improvement. 

Through these efforts, EPA will encourage government and business to adopt source 

reduction practices that can help to prevent pollution and avoid potential adverse health 

and environmental impacts. P2 grants to states and tribes provide support for technical 

assistance, education, and outreach to assist businesses. Work under these programs 

also supports the energy reduction goals under E.O. 13514. In FY 2012, the total 

funding for P2 programs is $20.7 million and 72.7 FTE. 

59
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

International Affairs 

Environmental pollution and contamination often extend well beyond a country’s 

individual borders. In the face of shared environmental challenges, such as global 

climate change and improving children’s environmental health outcomes, cooperation 

with global partners can catalyze even greater progress toward protecting our domestic 

environment. By partnering with and assisting other nations to improve their 

environmental governance, EPA also helps protect the U.S. from pollution originating 

outside our borders from reaching our citizens. These collaborative efforts are the key 

to sustaining and enhancing progress, both domestically and internationally. 

EPA’s international priorities include: building strong environmental institutions and 

legal structures; improving access to clean water; improving urban air quality; limiting 

global GHG emissions and other climate-forcing pollutants, reducing exposure to toxic 

chemicals, and reducing hazardous waste and improve waste management. 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires Federal agencies to prepare 

environmental impact statements (EISs) for actions that have the potential to cause 

significant environmental effects, and develop appropriate plans to mitigate or eliminate 

those impacts. EPA’s unique role in this process is reviewing and commenting on all 

Federal EISs and making the comments available to the public. In FY 2012, EPA will 

continue to work with other Federal agencies to streamline and to improve their NEPA 

processes. Work also will focus on a number of key areas such as review and 

comment on mining on-shore and off-shore liquid natural gas facilities, coal bed 

methane development and other energy-related projects, nuclear power/hydro-power 

plant licensing/re-licensing, highway and airport expansion, military base 

realignment/redevelopment (including the expansion in Guam), flood control and port 

development, and management of national forests and public lands. EPA also will 

conduct work pursuant to the Appalachian Coal Mining Interagency Action Plan. 

Research 

In FY 2012, EPA is strengthening its planning and delivery of science by implementing 

an integrated research approach that looks at problems systematically instead of 

individually. This approach will create synergy and yield benefits beyond those possible 

from approaches that are more narrowly targeted to single chemicals or problem areas. 

EPA is realigning and integrating the work of its base research programs into four new 

research programs (further described in the Goal 1 overview and appendix). 

The new Chemical Safety and Sustainability (CSS) Program will develop enhanced 

chemical screening and testing approaches for improving context-relevant chemical 

assessment and management. New computational, physico-chemical, and biological 

and exposure science tools promise to transform the way risks of chemical products are 

evaluated. Development and validation will proceed on broadly applicable, predictive, 

60
 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

high-throughput tools to be combined with existing test methods, integrating toxicity and 

exposure pathways in the context of the life cycle of the chemical. In FY 2012, EPA will 

begin a multi-year transition from the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) 

to validate and more efficiently use computational toxicology methods and high 

throughput screens that will allow the Agency to more quickly and cost-effectively 

assess potential chemical toxicity. As reflected in Figure V, testing 300 chemicals with 

computational toxicology methods costs on average about $20,000 per chemical 

compared to more traditional approaches that can cost more than $6 million per 

chemical. In FY 2012 EPA will begin to evaluate endocrine-relevant ToxCast assays. 

Figure V: EPA research 

is developing 

computational toxicology 

tools that are faster, 

more efficient, and have 

the capacity to test 

thousands of chemicals 

at a fraction of the cost 

for traditional animalbased testing (e.g., $2 

billion versus $6 million 

for 300 chemicals). This 

innovative research is 

critical to catalyzing 

sustainable solutions 

that inform decisions on 

chemical safety. 

CSS will also contribute to the Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research 

Program by providing decision makers in individual localities and communities with 

research and support on contaminants of highest priority and concern to them. Better 

and more integrated approaches to chemical testing and assessment also will lead to 

better air toxics and drinking water-related regional and local decision making. Under 

this newly consolidated research program, EPA will continue to support the scientific 

foundation for addressing the risks of exposure to chemicals in humans and wildlife. 

Resources requested total $95.7 million and 292.7 FTE. 

In FY 2012, the Agency’s Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) program will 

continue to develop assessments including Integrated Science Assessments (ISA) of 

criteria air pollutants, Integrated Risk Information Systems (IRIS) Assessments of high 

priority chemicals, and Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTV). The 

program will release draft ISAs for ozone and lead for Clean Air Science Advisory 

61
 

 

 

Goal 4: Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution 

Committee review and public comment. The program will strive to post numerous 

completed human health assessments (e.g. dioxin, methanol, cumulative phthalate 

assessment, benzo-a-pyrene, Libby asbestos cancer assessment, and PCB noncancer 

assessment) in IRIS. 

EPA also conducts research supporting Goal 4 through its Science to Achieve Results 

(STAR) program, which leverages innovative and cutting-edge research from scientists 

in academia through a competitive and peer-reviewed grant process that is integrated 

with EPA’s overall research efforts. The Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP) 

will continue to enhance the nation’s preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities 

for homeland security incidents and other hazards. 

62
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

Strategic Goal: Protect human health and the environment through vigorous and 

targeted civil and criminal enforcement. Assure compliance with environmental laws. 

9.2% of Budget 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000) 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Difference 

FY 2010 EN 

to FY 2012 

PresBud 

1 - Enforce Environmental Laws $807,903 $807,903 $829,831 $21,929 

Goal 5 Total $807,903 $807,903 $829,831 $21,929 

Workyears 4,003 4,003 3,914 (89) 

NOTES: Numbers may not add due to rounding. 

FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations. 

Introduction 

EPA's civil and criminal enforcement programs perform the core function of assuring 

compliance with our nation's environmental laws. A strong and effective enforcement 

program is essential to maintain respect for the rule of law and to realize the promise of 

our federal statutes to protect our environment and the public health of our citizens. 

On January 18, 2011, President Obama issued a “Presidential Memoranda – 

Regulatory Compliance” which reaffirms the importance of effective enforcement and 

compliance in regulations. In part, it states “Sound regulatory enforcement promotes 

the welfare of Americans in many ways, by increasing public safety, improving working 

conditions, and protecting the air we breathe and the water we drink. Consistent 

regulatory enforcement also levels the playing field among regulated entities, ensuring 

that those that fail to comply with the law do not have an unfair advantage over their 

law-abiding competitors.” 

In FY 2012, EPA will maintain the strength of its core enforcement program and begin a 

new focus on harnessing the tools of 21st century technology to make our enforcement 

program more efficient and more effective for the future. We will also continue to 

address special challenges such as the litigation resulting from the BP Deepwater 

Horizon oil spill. 

63
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

Our current approach, rooted largely in the traditional inspection and enforcement 

model, has produced substantial public health and environmental benefits. However, 

use of modern technology and methods can reduce the costs of monitoring and 

ensuring compliance both to EPA and businesses, and enable us to do a more effective 

job. Today, we rely almost exclusively on time-consuming and expensive pollution tests 

that make it hard to quickly find and investigate the worst air, waste and water pollution, 

and for communities to know about pollution that affects them. It is increasingly difficult 

to ensure compliance using outdated tools and old approaches, as the universe of 

regulated pollution sources is outstripping the resources available to state and federal 

inspectors to find and correct non-compliance. 

EPA and its state partners simply cannot conduct enough inspections to ensure that the 

health and environmental benefits of laws passed by Congress are realized and 

catastrophes are avoided. The BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the Enbridge 

pipeline oil spill in Marshall, Michigan have generated a greater awareness of the 

growing need for the country to catch up when it comes to finding and correcting noncompliance to prevent damage and economic hardships. Yet the oil spill crises are just 

one piece of the puzzle. Today, states are adding more waters to the Clean Water Act’s 

list of impaired waters, while at the same time indicating that resource constraints are 

pushing them to seriously consider returning control of environmental protection 

programs to EPA. These and other issues argue for new approaches to ensuring 

compliance to enable the Agency to become more effective and efficient. 

A recent snapshot (see graph on following page) shows us that nationally reported 

compliance data – while it does not paint a complete picture – strongly indicates that 

violations are likely widespread. For example, non-compliance with the Clean Water 

Act’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits in many places averages 

60 percent – leading to concerns about health impacts in those places. 

64
 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

Non-Compliance Information Across Sectors1 

1

*Non-compliance rates based on data gathered during inspections/evaluations at a statistically valid sample of the 

regulated universe and defined as having a minimum of one violation with any given requirement examined during 

the inspection/evaluation. 

**Non-compliance rates are based on violations detected at facilities in these sectors during inspections and 

evaluations; not statistically valid sample, but based on completed evaluations for 61% of the Air Toxic targeted 

universe (LDAR, Flares, LDAR Misc., Petroleum Refining, Oil and Gas, Misc. Metal Parts and Fabric coating), 40% of 

the targeted universe for NSR/PSD (Acid Manufacturing, Cement Manufacturing, Glass Manufacturing), and 14% of 

the targeted universe for Mining and Mineral Processing (Phosphoric Acid, Other Mineral Processing, Mines). 

***Non-compliance rates are based on a combination of facility self-reported Discharge Monitoring Reports. (DMRs) 

and violations detected at facilities during inspections. 

65
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

Major FY 2012 Investment Areas 

In FY 2012, the Agency’s Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in Critical Areas 

investment will allow EPA to begin to move toward implementing a more efficient and 

effective enforcement program that uses 21st century e-reporting and monitoring tools, 

in combination with market-based approaches. Investments in new technology offer the 

opportunity to save the federal government, states, and American business valuable 

resources as overall compliance costs are reduced. EPA will also invest in more 

advanced monitoring tools, allowing EPA and its state partners to more easily identify, 

investigate and address the worst violations that affect our communities. The Agency 

requests $14.2 million and 4.0 FTE under Goal 5 for this investment. 

EPA will begin to review compliance reporting requirements in existing rules to identify 

opportunities for conversion to a national electronic reporting format; and examine new 

rules to incorporate electronic reporting elements during rule development. Eliminating 

existing paper based reporting systems will be an overarching goal of this initiative. As 

part of the process of developing new rules, EPA will identify opportunities to require 

objective, self-monitoring and/or self-certification. EPA will upgrade key data systems to 

allow for third-party certification, public accountability, advanced monitoring and 

electronic reporting requirements to improve compliance. 

EPA will begin enhancing its data systems to help the Agency and its regulatory 

partners better determine the compliance status of facilities, focus our resources to 

efficiently address the most serious non-compliance, and substantially reduce the costs 

of collecting, sharing, and analyzing compliance information. 

With this investment, EPA will use a market based approach to develop open platform 

“e-file” data exchange standards, modeled after that used by the IRS to collect tax data, 

which would unleash the expertise of the private sector marketplace to replace the 

largely paper-based reporting systems that have evolved over the past thirty years. 

Further, in those programs where EPA has already built electronic reporting tools, the 

private sector may enhance these tools to better support industry needs, enabling EPA 

to largely eliminate the need to continue to fund the operation and maintenance of these 

tools. 

With the requested resources, EPA also will begin to invest in modern monitoring 

technology such as portable emission detectors, thermal imaging cameras, flow meters, 

and remote (fenceline) monitoring equipment to increase the effectiveness and 

efficiency of our compliance monitoring program. Our investment includes an increase 

for monitoring equipment, as well as funding to train staff on the use of remote sensing 

techniques. Providing modern monitoring technology for EPA inspectors will enable 

field staff to perform more efficient and effective compliance verification. Modern 

monitoring equipment will increase EPA’s ability to detect violations across all programs 

and focus our efforts on the most significant problems. 

66
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

EPA’s response to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue in FY 2012 as the 

Agency provides support for the U.S. Department of Justice’s civil action and criminal 

investigations against BP, Anadarko, Transocean, and other responsible parties. The 

Department of Justice filed its civil complaint on behalf of EPA, the Coast Guard, and 

other federal plaintiffs in December 2010, and EPA will be actively providing litigation 

support, discovery management, and response to court orders throughout FY 2012. 

Currently, EPA resources are being used to support Department of Justice’s on-going 

civil investigations. 

Major FY 2012 Disinvestments and Reductions 

•	 Eliminating funding for homeland security enforcement efforts because EPA will not 

need to maintain separate capacity to support environmental criminal investigations 

and training for terrorism-related investigations. This reduction reflects the increased 

capacity of other agencies to handle the environmental forensics work associated 

with security incidents. 

•	 Reducing funding for Enforcement Training, relying more on web-based tools to 

more efficiently deliver compliance assistance and training, reducing staff intensive 

activities. 

•	 Reducing funding for Superfund Enforcement that could have been used for PRP 

searches and settlement activity. 

•	 Reducing funding to the Department of Justice for CERCLA case support. 

•	 Reducing funding for Criminal Enforcement that could have been used for 

investigative support for criminal cases. 

Priority Goal 

EPA has established a Priority Goal to focus and highlight progress made through 

enforcement actions to clean up the nation’s polluted waters. The Priority Goal is: 

Clean water is essential for our quality of life and the health of our communities. 

EPA will take actions over the next two years to improve water quality. 

Improve Water Quality: Federal Clean Water Enforcement 

•	 Increase pollutant reducing enforcement actions in waters that don’t meet water 

quality standards, and post results and analysis on the web. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to track progress towards its Priority Goals and will 

update goals as necessary and appropriate. 

67
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

FY 2012 Activities 

While making the reforms described above to improve our core business practices for 

monitoring and reporting, the Agency remains committed to implementing a strong 

enforcement and compliance program focused on identifying and reducing noncompliance problems and deterring future violations. In order to meet these goals, the 

program employs an integrated, common-sense approach to problem-solving and 

decision-making. An appropriate mix of data collection and analysis, compliance 

monitoring, assistance and incentives, civil and criminal enforcement efforts and 

innovative problem-solving approaches addresses significant environmental issues and 

achieve environmentally beneficial outcomes. As discussed above, enhancing these 

efforts through a new approach that relies on 21st century reporting and monitoring tools 

will be the focus of our efforts in FY 2012 and will be used to advance implementation of 

the Administrator’s priorities as well as our core program work. Including the new FY 

2012 investment, $375.7 million and 2,132.7 FTE will support compliance monitoring 

and civil and criminal enforcement activities. 

Focus Areas: 

•	 Protecting Air Quality: EPA will focus on the largest sources of air pollution, 

including coal-fired power plants and the cement, acid and glass sectors, to improve 

air quality. Enforcement to cut toxic air pollution in communities improves the health 

of communities, particularly those overburdened by pollution. 

The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 requires increased use 

of renewable fuels. EPA’s Civil Enforcement program will help the regulated 

community understand their statutory obligations under the EISA; inspect renewable 

fuel production facilities; monitor compliance with renewable fuel requirements; 

monitor and enforce the credit trading program; and, undertake administrative and 

judicial enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

•	 Protecting America’s Waters: EPA, working with permitting authorities, is revamping 

compliance and enforcement approaches to make progress on the most important 

water pollution problems. This work includes getting raw sewage out of water, 

cutting pollution from animal waste and reducing pollution from stormwater runoff. 

These efforts will help to clean up great waters like the Chesapeake Bay and will 

focus on revitalizing urban communities by protecting and restoring urban waters. 

Enforcement will also support the goal of assuring clean drinking water for all 

communities, including small systems and in Indian country. 

•	 Cleaning Up Our Communities: EPA protects communities by ensuring that 

responsible parties conduct cleanups, saving federal dollars for sites where there 

are no viable contributing parties. Ensuring that these parties clean up the sites 

ultimately reduces direct human exposure to hazardous pollutants and 

contaminants, provides for long-term human health protection, and ultimately makes 

contaminated properties available for reuse. 

68
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

EPA’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action 

enforcement program supports the goal set by the Agency and its state partners of 

attaining remedy construction at 95 percent of 3,747 RCRA facilities by the year 

2020. In 2010, EPA issued the “National Enforcement Strategy for Corrective 

Action” to promote and communicate nationally consistent enforcement and 

compliance assurance principles, practices, and tools to help achieve this goal. In 

FY 2012, EPA will continue targeted enforcement under the Strategy and will work 

with its state partners to assess the contribution of enforcement in achieving the 

2020 goal. 

•	 Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals and Preventing Pollution: Strengthening chemical 

safety enforcement and reducing exposure to pesticides will improve the health of 

Americans. Enforcement reduces direct human exposures to toxic chemicals and 

pesticides and supports long-term human health protection. 

Compliance Monitoring 

EPA’s Compliance Monitoring program reviews and evaluates the activities of the 

regulated community to determine compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit 

conditions and settlement agreements, as well as to determine whether conditions 

presenting imminent and substantial endangerment exist. In FY 2012, EPA’s 

compliance monitoring activities will be both environmental media- and sector-based. 

EPA’s media-based inspections complement those performed by states and tribes, and 

are a key part of our strategy for meeting the long-term and annual goals established for 

the air, water, pesticides, toxic substances and hazardous waste programs. 

Compliance monitoring includes EPA’s management and use of data systems to run its 

compliance and enforcement programs under the various statutes and programs that 

EPA enforces. In FY 2012, the Agency will begin the process of enhancing its data 

systems to support electronic reporting, providing more comprehensive, accessible data 

to the public and improving integration of environmental information with health data 

and other pertinent data sources from other federal agencies and private entities. The 

Agency will continue its multi-year project to modernize its national enforcement and 

compliance data system, the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), which 

supports both compliance monitoring and civil enforcement. 

Civil Enforcement 

The Civil Enforcement program’s overarching goal is to assure compliance with the 

nation’s environmental laws and regulations in order to protect human health and the 

environment. The program collaborates with the Department of Justice, states, local 

agencies and Tribal governments to ensure consistent and fair enforcement of all 

environmental laws and regulations. The program seeks to protect public health and 

the environment and ensure a level playing field by strengthening our partnership with 

our co-implementers in the states, encouraging regulated entities to rapidly correct their 

69
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

own violations, ensuring that violators do not realize an economic benefit from 

noncompliance and pursuing enforcement to deter future violations. 

The Civil Enforcement program develops, litigates and settles administrative and civil 

judicial cases against serious violators of environmental laws. In FY 2010, EPA 

achieved commitments to invest more than $12 billion in future pollution controls and 

pollution reduction commitments totaling approximately 1.5 billion pounds. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to target implementation of the National Compliance and 

Enforcement Initiatives established for FY 2011-2013. These national initiatives 

address problems that remain complex and challenging, including Clean Water Act “wet 

weather” discharges, violations of the Clean Air Act New Source Review/Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration requirements and Air Toxics regulations, RCRA violations at 

mineral processing facilities, and multi-media problems resulting from energy extraction 

activities. Information on initiatives, regulatory requirements, enforcement alerts and 

EPA results will be made available to the public and the regulated community through 

web-based sites. The Civil Enforcement program also will support the Environmental 

Justice program and the Administrator’s priority to address pollution impacting 

vulnerable populations. The Civil Enforcement program will focus actions on facilities 

that have repeatedly violated environmental laws in communities that may be 

disproportionately exposed to risks and harms from the environment, including minority 

and/or low-income areas. In addition, the Civil Enforcement program will help to 

implement the President’s directive to develop and implement a compliance and 

enforcement strategy for the Chesapeake Bay, providing strong oversight to ensure 

existing regulations are complied with consistently and in a timely manner. 

Criminal Enforcement 

Criminal Enforcement underlies our commitment to pursuing the most serious pollution 

violations. EPA’s Criminal Enforcement program investigates and helps prosecute 

environmental violations that seriously threaten public health and the environment and 

involve intentional, deliberate or criminal behavior on the part of the violator. The 

Criminal Enforcement program deters violations of environmental laws and regulations 

by demonstrating that the regulated community will be held accountable, through jail 

sentences and criminal fines. Bringing criminal cases sends a strong deterrence 

message to potential violators, enhances aggregate compliance with laws and 

regulations and protects our communities. 

The program has completed its three-year hiring strategy, raising the number of special 

agents to 200, and will use this capacity to address complex environmental cases in FY 

2012. In FY 2012, the Criminal Enforcement program will expand its identification and 

investigation of cases with significant environmental, human health and deterrence 

impact while balancing its overall case load across all pollution statutes. EPA’s Criminal 

Enforcement program will focus on cases across all media that involve serious harm or 

70
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

injury; hazardous or toxic releases; ongoing, repetitive, or multiple releases; serious 

documented exposure to pollutants; and violators with significant repeat or chronic 

noncompliance or prior criminal conviction. 

Superfund Enforcement 

EPA’s Superfund Enforcement program protects communities by ensuring that 

responsible parties conduct cleanups, preserving Federal dollars for sites where there 

are no viable contributing parties. Superfund Enforcement ensures prompt site cleanup 

and uses an “enforcement first” approach that maximizes the participation of liable and 

viable parties in performing and paying for cleanups in both the remedial and removal 

programs. The Superfund Enforcement program includes nationally significant or 

precedential civil, judicial and administrative site remediation cases. The program also 

provides legal and technical enforcement support on Superfund Enforcement actions 

and emerging issues. The Superfund Enforcement program also develops waste 

cleanup enforcement policies and provides guidance and tools that clarify potential 

environmental cleanup liability, with specific attention to the reuse and revitalization of 

contaminated properties, including Brownfields properties. 

Enforcement authorities play a unique role under the Superfund program. The 

authorities are used to ensure that responsible parties conduct a majority of the cleanup 

actions and reimburse the federal government for cleanups financed by Federal 

resources. In tandem with this approach, various reforms have been implemented to 

increase fairness, reduce transaction costs, promote economic development and make 

sites available for appropriate reuse.2 Ensuring that these parties clean up sites 

ultimately reduces direct human exposures to hazardous pollutants and contaminants, 

provides for long-term human health protections and makes contaminated properties 

available for reuse. 

The Department of Justice supports EPA’s Superfund Enforcement program through 

negotiations and judicial actions to compel Potentially Responsible Parties (PRP) 

cleanup and litigation to recover Trust Fund monies. In FY 2010, the Superfund 

Enforcement program secured private party commitments that exceeded $1.6 billion. 

Of this amount, PRPs have committed to future response work with an estimated value 

of approximately $1.4 billion; PRPs have agreed to reimburse the Agency for $150 

million in past costs; and PRPs have been billed by the EPA for approximately $82 

million in oversight costs. EPA also works to ensure that required legally enforceable 

institutional controls and financial assurance instruments are in place and adhered to at 

Superfund sites and at facilities subject to RCRA Corrective Action to ensure the longterm protectiveness of cleanup actions. 

In FY 2012, the Agency will negotiate remedial design/remedial action cleanup 

agreements and removal agreements at contaminated properties to address 

contamination impacting local communities. When appropriated dollars are used to 

2 For more information regarding EPA’s enforcement program and its various components, please refer to 

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/cleanup/superfund/. 

71
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goal 5: Enforcing Environmental Laws 

clean up sites, the program will recover the associated cleanup costs from the 

Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs). If future work remains at a site, recovered 

funds could be placed in a site-specific special account pursuant to the agreement. 

Special accounts are sub-accounts within EPA’s Superfund Trust Fund. The Agency 

will continue its efforts to establish special accounts and to use and track those funds 

efficiently to facilitate and advance cleanups. As of the end of FY 2010, 1,023 sitespecific special accounts were established and over $3.7 billion were deposited into 

special accounts (including earned interest). EPA has obligated and dispersed 

approximately $1.85 billion from special accounts to finance site response actions and 

has developed multi-year plans to use the remaining funds as expeditiously as possible. 

These funds will be used to conduct many different CERCLA response actions, 

including, but not limited to, investigations to determine the extent of contamination and 

appropriate remedy required, construction of the remedy, enforcement activities, and 

post-construction monitoring. 

During FY 2012, the Agency will continue to refine the cost documentation process to 

gain further efficiencies; provide DOJ case support for Superfund sites; and calculate 

indirect cost and annual allocation rates to be applied to direct costs incurred by EPA for 

site cleanup. The Agency also will continue to maintain the accounting and billing of 

Superfund oversight costs attributable to responsible parties as stipulated in the terms 

of settlement agreements. 

Partnering with States, Tribes and Communities 

EPA shares accountability for environmental and human health protection with states 

and tribes. Most states have been delegated the legal responsibility for implementing 

environmental programs. We work together to target the most important pollution 

violations and ensure that companies that meet their obligations and are responsible 

neighbors are not put at a competitive disadvantage. EPA also has a responsibility to 

oversee state and Tribal implementation of federal laws to ensure that the same level of 

protection for the environment and the public applies across the country. 

Enforcement promotes environmental justice by equitably targeting pollution problems 

that affect low income, minority, and/or tribal communities. Ensuring compliance with 

environmental laws is particularly important in communities that are exposed to greater 

environmental health risks. EPA fosters community involvement by making information 

about compliance and government action available to the public. Increased 

transparency is also an effective tool for improving compliance. By making information 

on violations both available and understandable, EPA empowers citizens to demand 

better compliance. 

72
Appendices
 

73
74
Resources by Appropriation 

Summary of Agency Resources by Appropriation

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Appropriation Account Budget 

FY 2011 

Annualized
 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget
 

Change
 

FY 10 EN to
 

FY 12 PB
 

Science & Technology (S&T) 1, 2 $848,049 $846,049 $825,596 ($22,453) 

Environmental Programs & Management (EPM) $2,993,779 $2,993,779 $2,876,634 ($117,145) 

Inspector General (IG) 1 $44,791 $44,791 $45,997 $1,206 

Buildings & Facilities (B&F) $37,001 $37,001 $41,969 $4,968 

Inland Oil Spill Programs (OIL) $18,379 $18,379 $23,662 $5,283 

Superfund (SF) $1,306,541 $1,306,541 $1,236,231 ($70,310) 

- Superfund Programs $1,269,732 $1,269,732 $1,203,206 ($66,526) 

- Inspector General Transfer $9,975 $9,975 $10,009 $34 

- Science & Technology Transfer $26,834 $26,834 $23,016 ($3,818) 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) $113,101 $113,101 $112,481 ($620) 

State & Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 3 $4,978,223 $4,978,223 $3,860,430 ($1,117,793) 

Rescission or Cancellation of Prior Year Funds ($40,000) ($40,000) ($50,000) ($10,000) 

Agency Total: $10,299,864 $10,297,864 $8,973,000 ($1,326,864) 

NOTE: FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
 

1 Does not include Superfund transfers—see the Superfund line items below for annual amounts.
 2 Includes $2 million for FY 2010 in supplementary funding from P.L. 111-212.
 3 FY 2010 and FY 2011 resource totals include $8 million in Specified Infrastructure Grants for Hunter's
 

Point, CA.
 

75
76
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Science & Technology 

Clean Air and Climate 

Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs $9,963.0 $9,329.3 $9,963.0 $9,797.0 ($166.0) 

Climate Protection Program $19,797.0 $20,126.8 $19,797.0 $16,345.0 ($3,452.0) 

Federal Support for Air Quality Management $11,443.0 $12,480.6 $11,443.0 $7,650.0 ($3,793.0) 

Federal Support for Air Toxics Program $2,398.0 $2,381.7 $2,398.0 $0.0 ($2,398.0) 

Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification $91,782.0 $87,648.2 $91,782.0 $100,578.0 $8,796.0 

Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate $135,383.0 $131,966.6 $135,383.0 $134,370.0 ($1,013.0) 

Indoor Air and Radiation 

Indoor Air: Radon Program $453.0 $485.6 $453.0 $210.0 ($243.0) 

Reduce Risks from Indoor Air $762.0 $808.0 $762.0 $370.0 ($392.0) 

Radiation: Protection $2,095.0 $1,962.1 $2,095.0 $2,096.0 $1.0 

Radiation: Response Preparedness $4,176.0 $4,242.7 $4,176.0 $4,082.0 ($94.0) 

Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation $7,486.0 $7,498.4 $7,486.0 $6,758.0 ($728.0) 

Enforcement 

Forensics Support $15,351.0 $15,245.3 $15,351.0 $15,326.0 ($25.0) 

Homeland Security 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 

Water Sentinel $18,576.0 $13,953.7 $18,576.0 $8,632.0 ($9,944.0) 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure 

Protection (other activities) $4,450.0 $7,001.2 $4,450.0 $2,747.0 ($1,703.0) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure 

Protection $23,026.0 $20,954.9 $23,026.0 $11,379.0 ($11,647.0) 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and 

Recovery 

Decontamination $24,857.0 $20,448.7 $24,857.0 $17,382.0 ($7,475.0) 

Laboratory Preparedness and Response $499.0 $438.3 $499.0 $0.0 ($499.0) 

Safe Building $1,996.0 $1,225.2 $1,996.0 $0.0 ($1,996.0) 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery (other activities) $14,305.0 $15,585.7 $14,305.0 $12,696.0 ($1,609.0) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security: Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery $41,657.0 $37,697.9 $41,657.0 $30,078.0 ($11,579.0) 

Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and 

Infrastructure $593.0 $593.0 $593.0 $579.0 ($14.0) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security $65,276.0 $59,245.8 $65,276.0 $42,036.0 ($23,240.0) 

77
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

IT / Data Management / Security 

IT / Data Management $4,385.0 $4,054.0 $4,385.0 $4,108.0 ($277.0) 

Operations and Administration 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Rent 

Utilities 

Security 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other 

activities) 

Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Subtotal, Operations and Administration 

$33,947.0 

$19,177.0 

$10,260.0 

$9,534.0 

$72,918.0 

$72,918.0 

$34,102.2 

$21,934.3 

$9,218.0 

$7,587.2 

$72,841.7 

$72,841.7 

$33,947.0 

$19,177.0 

$10,260.0 

$9,534.0 

$72,918.0 

$72,918.0 

$35,661.0 

$20,195.0 

$10,714.0 

$9,951.0 

$76,521.0 

$76,521.0 

$1,714.0 

$1,018.0 

$454.0 

$417.0 

$3,603.0 

$3,603.0 

Pesticides Licensing 

Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk 

Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk 

Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability 

Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing 

$3,750.0 

$2,279.0 

$537.0 

$6,566.0 

$4,146.4 

$2,285.9 

$505.1 

$6,937.4 

$3,750.0 

$2,279.0 

$537.0 

$6,566.0 

$3,839.0 

$2,448.0 

$544.0 

$6,831.0 

$89.0 

$169.0 

$7.0 

$265.0 

Research: Air, Climate and Energy 

Research: Air, Climate and Energy 

Global Change 

Clean Air 

Research: Air, Climate and Energy (other 

activities) 

Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate and Energy 

Subtotal, Research: Air, Climate and Energy 

$20,822.0 

$81,605.0 

$9,022.0 

$111,449.0 

$111,449.0 

$19,646.9 

$74,670.2 

$8,441.0 

$102,758.1 

$102,758.1 

$20,822.0 

$81,605.0 

$9,022.0 

$111,449.0 

$111,449.0 

$20,805.0 

$83,102.0 

$4,093.0 

$108,000.0 

$108,000.0 

($17.0) 

$1,497.0 

($4,929.0) 

($3,449.0) 

($3,449.0) 

Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 

Research: Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 

Drinking Water 

Water Quality 

Research: Safe and Sustainable Water 

Resources (other activities) 

$49,103.0 

$61,918.0 

$52.0 

$50,346.0 

$58,586.9 

$0.0 

$49,103.0 

$61,918.0 

$52.0 

$52,495.0 

$66,229.0 

$52.0 

$3,392.0 

$4,311.0 

$0.0 

78
 

 

Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

Subtotal, Research: Safe and Sustainable Water 

Resources 

Subtotal, Research: Safe and Sustainable Water 

Resources 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

$111,073.0 

$111,073.0 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

$108,932.9 

$108,932.9 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

$111,073.0 

$111,073.0 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

$118,776.0 

$118,776.0 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

$7,703.0 

$7,703.0 

Research: Sustainable Communities 

Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 

Human Health 

Ecosystems 

Research: Sustainable and Healthy 

Communities (other activities) 

Subtotal, Research: Sustainable and Healthy 

Communities 

Subtotal, Research: Sustainable Communities 

$54,180.0 

$71,698.0 

$62,217.0 

$188,095.0 

$188,095.0 

$54,324.6 

$68,805.1 

$59,873.0 

$183,002.7 

$183,002.7 

$53,180.0 

$70,698.0 

$62,217.0 

$186,095.0 

$186,095.0 

$45,392.0 

$60,905.0 

$64,729.0 

$171,026.0 

$171,026.0 

($8,788.0) 

($10,793.0) 

$2,512.0 

($17,069.0) 

($17,069.0) 

Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

Human Health Risk Assessment 

Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

Endocrine Disruptors 

Computational Toxicology 

Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

(other activities) 

Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and 

Sustainability 

Subtotal, Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

$42,899.0 

$11,350.0 

$20,044.0 

$46,437.0 

$77,831.0 

$120,730.0 

$41,516.4 

$12,471.9 

$13,929.9 

$48,819.3 

$75,221.1 

$116,737.5 

$42,899.0 

$11,350.0 

$20,044.0 

$46,437.0 

$77,831.0 

$120,730.0 

$42,400.0 

$16,883.0 

$21,209.0 

$57,565.0 

$95,657.0 

$138,057.0 

($499.0) 

$5,533.0 

$1,165.0 

$11,128.0 

$17,826.0 

$17,327.0 

Water: Human Health Protection 

Drinking Water Programs $3,637.0 $3,889.3 $3,637.0 $3,787.0 $150.0 

Congressional Priorities 

Congressionally Mandated Projects 

Total, Science & Technology 

$5,700.0 

$848,049.0 

$4,568.0 

$817,677.7 

$5,700.0 

$846,049.0 

$0.0 

$825,596.0 

($5,700.0) 

($22,453.0) 

Environmental Program & Management 

Clean Air and Climate 

Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 

Climate Protection Program 

Energy STAR 

$20,791.0 

$52,606.0 

$20,664.3 

$42,138.0 

$20,791.0 

$52,606.0 

$20,842.0 

$55,628.0 

$51.0 

$3,022.0 

79
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Methane to markets $4,569.0 $5,272.8 $4,569.0 $5,616.0 $1,047.0 

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Registry $16,685.0 $15,990.7 $16,685.0 $17,646.0 $961.0 

Climate Protection Program (other activities) $39,184.0 $46,324.6 $39,184.0 $32,529.0 ($6,655.0) 

Subtotal, Climate Protection Program $113,044.0 $109,726.1 $113,044.0 $111,419.0 ($1,625.0) 

Federal Stationary Source Regulations $27,158.0 $26,195.8 $27,158.0 $34,096.0 $6,938.0 

Federal Support for Air Quality Management $99,619.0 $103,224.6 $99,619.0 $133,822.0 $34,203.0 

Federal Support for Air Toxics Program $24,446.0 $23,468.8 $24,446.0 $0.0 ($24,446.0) 

Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs $5,934.0 $6,159.4 $5,934.0 $5,612.0 ($322.0) 

Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund $9,840.0 $9,840.0 $9,840.0 $9,495.0 ($345.0) 

Subtotal, Clean Air and Climate $300,832.0 $299,279.0 $300,832.0 $315,286.0 $14,454.0 

Indoor Air and Radiation 

Indoor Air: Radon Program $5,866.0 $5,408.1 $5,866.0 $3,901.0 ($1,965.0) 

Reduce Risks from Indoor Air $20,759.0 $19,253.0 $20,759.0 $17,198.0 ($3,561.0) 

Radiation: Protection $11,295.0 $11,433.3 $11,295.0 $9,629.0 ($1,666.0) 

Radiation: Response Preparedness $3,077.0 $2,827.9 $3,077.0 $3,042.0 ($35.0) 

Subtotal, Indoor Air and Radiation $40,997.0 $38,922.3 $40,997.0 $33,770.0 ($7,227.0) 

Brownfields 

Brownfields $24,152.0 $24,465.3 $24,152.0 $26,397.0 $2,245.0 

Compliance 

Compliance Assistance and Centers $25,622.0 $23,628.3 $25,622.0 $0.0 ($25,622.0) 

Compliance Incentives $9,560.0 $8,792.6 $9,560.0 $0.0 ($9,560.0) 

Compliance Monitoring $99,400.0 $97,937.7 $99,400.0 $119,648.0 $20,248.0 

Subtotal, Compliance $134,582.0 $130,358.6 $134,582.0 $119,648.0 ($14,934.0) 

Enforcement 

Civil Enforcement $146,636.0 $145,896.6 $146,636.0 $191,404.0 $44,768.0 

Criminal Enforcement $49,637.0 $49,043.2 $49,637.0 $51,345.0 $1,708.0 

Enforcement Training $3,278.0 $3,220.0 $3,278.0 $0.0 ($3,278.0) 

Environmental Justice $7,090.0 $9,567.4 $7,090.0 $7,397.0 $307.0 

NEPA Implementation $18,258.0 $18,313.4 $18,258.0 $18,072.0 ($186.0) 

Subtotal, Enforcement $224,899.0 $226,040.6 $224,899.0 $268,218.0 $43,319.0 

Geographic Programs 

Great Lakes Restoration $475,000.0 $430,818.2 $475,000.0 $350,000.0 ($125,000.0) 

80
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay $50,000.0 $53,192.7 $50,000.0 $67,350.0 $17,350.0 

Geographic Program: Great Lakes $0.0 $1,752.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 

Geographic Program: San Francisco Bay $7,000.0 $10,087.1 $7,000.0 $4,847.0 ($2,153.0) 

Geographic Program: Puget Sound $50,000.0 $40,040.4 $50,000.0 $19,289.0 ($30,711.0) 

Geographic Program: South Florida $2,168.0 $2,321.5 $2,168.0 $2,061.0 ($107.0) 

Geographic Program: Mississippi River Basin $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $6,000.0 $6,000.0 

Geographic Program: Long Island Sound $7,000.0 $6,141.9 $7,000.0 $2,962.0 ($4,038.0) 

Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico $6,000.0 $7,671.7 $6,000.0 $4,464.0 ($1,536.0) 

Geographic Program: Lake Champlain $4,000.0 $486.9 $4,000.0 $1,399.0 ($2,601.0) 

Geographic Program: Other 

Lake Pontchartrain $1,500.0 $996.0 $1,500.0 $955.0 ($545.0) 

Community Action for a Renewed 

Environment (CARE) $2,448.0 $1,648.9 $2,448.0 $2,384.0 ($64.0) 

Geographic Program: Other (other activities) $3,325.0 $1,901.0 $3,325.0 $1,296.0 ($2,029.0) 

Subtotal, Geographic Program: Other $7,273.0 $4,545.9 $7,273.0 $4,635.0 ($2,638.0) 

Subtotal, Geographic Programs $608,441.0 $557,058.6 $608,441.0 $463,007.0 ($145,434.0) 

Homeland Security 

Homeland Security: Communication and Information $6,926.0 $7,206.3 $6,926.0 $4,257.0 ($2,669.0) 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 

Decontamination $99.0 $156.1 $99.0 $0.0 ($99.0) 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure 

Protection (other activities) $6,737.0 $6,649.0 $6,737.0 $1,065.0 ($5,672.0) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure 

Protection $6,836.0 $6,805.1 $6,836.0 $1,065.0 ($5,771.0) 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and 

Recovery 

Decontamination $3,423.0 $1,573.3 $3,423.0 $0.0 ($3,423.0) 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery (other activities) $0.0 $2,690.9 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 

Subtotal, Homeland Security: Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery $3,423.0 $4,264.2 $3,423.0 $0.0 ($3,423.0) 

Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and 

Infrastructure $6,369.0 $6,300.3 $6,369.0 $5,978.0 ($391.0) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security $23,554.0 $24,575.9 $23,554.0 $11,300.0 ($12,254.0) 

Information Exchange / Outreach 

Children and Other Sensitive Populations: Agency 

Coordination $7,100.0 $5,715.8 $7,100.0 $10,795.0 $3,695.0 

Environmental Education $9,038.0 $7,396.6 $9,038.0 $9,885.0 $847.0 

81
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations $51,944.0 $52,787.0 $51,944.0 $52,268.0 $324.0 

Exchange Network $17,024.0 $17,918.5 $17,024.0 $20,883.0 $3,859.0 

Small Business Ombudsman $3,028.0 $3,488.5 $3,028.0 $2,953.0 ($75.0) 

Small Minority Business Assistance $2,350.0 $2,133.1 $2,350.0 $2,280.0 ($70.0) 

State and Local Prevention and Preparedness $13,303.0 $13,426.7 $13,303.0 $14,613.0 $1,310.0 

TRI / Right to Know $14,933.0 $15,230.9 $14,933.0 $16,463.0 $1,530.0 

Tribal - Capacity Building $12,080.0 $13,040.9 $12,080.0 $15,070.0 $2,990.0 

Subtotal, Information Exchange / Outreach $130,800.0 $131,138.0 $130,800.0 $145,210.0 $14,410.0 

International Programs 

US Mexico Border $4,969.0 $4,997.8 $4,969.0 $4,912.0 ($57.0) 

International Sources of Pollution $8,628.0 $8,514.5 $8,628.0 $8,302.0 ($326.0) 

Trade and Governance $6,227.0 $6,359.8 $6,227.0 $6,233.0 $6.0 

Subtotal, International Programs $19,824.0 $19,872.1 $19,824.0 $19,447.0 ($377.0) 

IT / Data Management / Security 

Information Security $5,912.0 $5,881.7 $5,912.0 $6,837.0 $925.0 

IT / Data Management $97,410.0 $98,258.9 $97,410.0 $88,576.0 ($8,834.0) 

Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security $103,322.0 $104,140.6 $103,322.0 $95,413.0 ($7,909.0) 

Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 

Administrative Law $5,275.0 $5,424.8 $5,275.0 $5,386.0 $111.0 

Alternative Dispute Resolution $1,147.0 $1,313.8 $1,147.0 $1,329.0 $182.0 

Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance $12,224.0 $12,413.1 $12,224.0 $11,685.0 ($539.0) 

Legal Advice: Environmental Program $42,662.0 $42,826.7 $42,662.0 $45,352.0 $2,690.0 

Legal Advice: Support Program $14,419.0 $14,727.9 $14,419.0 $15,873.0 $1,454.0 

Regional Science and Technology $3,271.0 $3,146.2 $3,271.0 $3,283.0 $12.0 

Integrated Environmental Strategies $18,917.0 $18,366.6 $18,917.0 $17,509.0 ($1,408.0) 

Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis $19,404.0 $19,041.3 $19,404.0 $22,326.0 $2,922.0 

Science Advisory Board $6,278.0 $6,157.2 $6,278.0 $5,867.0 ($411.0) 

Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review $123,597.0 $123,417.6 $123,597.0 $128,610.0 $5,013.0 

Operations and Administration 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Rent $157,040.0 $161,817.5 $157,040.0 $170,807.0 $13,767.0 

Utilities $13,514.0 $2,539.3 $13,514.0 $11,221.0 ($2,293.0) 

82
 

 

Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Security $27,997.0 $27,326.6 $27,997.0 $29,266.0 $1,269.0 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other 

activities) $116,687.0 $118,555.4 $116,687.0 $113,671.0 ($3,016.0) 

Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations $315,238.0 $310,238.8 $315,238.0 $324,965.0 $9,727.0 

Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance $82,834.0 $86,883.5 $82,834.0 $77,548.0 ($5,286.0) 

Acquisition Management $32,404.0 $33,272.6 $32,404.0 $34,119.0 $1,715.0 

Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management $25,487.0 $24,311.6 $25,487.0 $26,223.0 $736.0 

Human Resources Management $42,447.0 $43,526.7 $42,447.0 $44,680.0 $2,233.0 

Recovery Act Mangement and Oversight $0.0 $22,237.5 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 

Subtotal, Operations and Administration $498,410.0 $520,470.7 $498,410.0 $507,535.0 $9,125.0 

Pesticides Licensing 

Pesticides: Protect Human Health from Pesticide Risk $62,944.0 $62,696.4 $62,944.0 $58,304.0 ($4,640.0) 

Pesticides: Protect the Environment from Pesticide Risk $42,203.0 $41,584.5 $42,203.0 $37,913.0 ($4,290.0) 

Pesticides: Realize the Value of Pesticide Availability $13,145.0 $13,508.9 $13,145.0 $12,550.0 ($595.0) 

Science Policy and Biotechnology $1,840.0 $1,349.5 $1,840.0 $1,756.0 ($84.0) 

Subtotal, Pesticides Licensing $120,132.0 $119,139.3 $120,132.0 $110,523.0 ($9,609.0) 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

RCRA: Waste Management 

eManifest $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $2,000.0 $2,000.0 

RCRA: Waste Management (other activities) $68,842.0 $71,171.2 $68,842.0 $64,854.0 ($3,988.0) 

Subtotal, RCRA: Waste Management $68,842.0 $71,171.2 $68,842.0 $66,854.0 ($1,988.0) 

RCRA: Corrective Action $40,029.0 $39,366.0 $40,029.0 $40,266.0 $237.0 

RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling $14,379.0 $13,063.3 $14,379.0 $9,751.0 ($4,628.0) 

Subtotal, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA) $123,250.0 $123,600.5 $123,250.0 $116,871.0 ($6,379.0) 

Toxics Risk Review and Prevention 

Endocrine Disruptors $8,625.0 $8,513.2 $8,625.0 $8,268.0 ($357.0) 

Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and 

Reduction $54,886.0 $53,458.7 $54,886.0 $70,939.0 $16,053.0 

Pollution Prevention Program $18,050.0 $18,014.5 $18,050.0 $15,653.0 ($2,397.0) 

Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management $6,025.0 $7,193.0 $6,025.0 $6,105.0 $80.0 

Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program $14,329.0 $13,429.3 $14,329.0 $14,332.0 $3.0 

Subtotal, Toxics Risk Review and Prevention $101,915.0 $100,608.7 $101,915.0 $115,297.0 $13,382.0 

83
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 

LUST / UST $12,424.0 $12,833.9 $12,424.0 $12,866.0 $442.0 

Water: Ecosystems 

Great Lakes Legacy Act 

National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways 

Wetlands 

Subtotal, Water: Ecosystems 

$0.0 

$32,567.0 

$25,940.0 

$58,507.0 

$33,030.3 

$29,796.8 

$27,130.2 

$89,957.3 

$0.0 

$32,567.0 

$25,940.0 

$58,507.0 

$0.0 

$27,058.0 

$27,368.0 

$54,426.0 

$0.0 

($5,509.0) 

$1,428.0 

($4,081.0) 

Water: Human Health Protection 

Beach / Fish Programs 

Drinking Water Programs 

Subtotal, Water: Human Health Protection 

$2,944.0 

$102,224.0 

$105,168.0 

$2,981.4 

$99,394.2 

$102,375.6 

$2,944.0 

$102,224.0 

$105,168.0 

$2,708.0 

$104,616.0 

$107,324.0 

($236.0) 

$2,392.0 

$2,156.0 

Water Quality Protection 

Marine Pollution 

Surface Water Protection 

Subtotal, Water Quality Protection 

$13,397.0 

$208,626.0 

$222,023.0 

$9,783.7 

$201,136.3 

$210,920.0 

$13,397.0 

$208,626.0 

$222,023.0 

$13,417.0 

$212,069.0 

$225,486.0 

$20.0 

$3,443.0 

$3,463.0 

Congressional Priorities 

Congressionally Mandated Projects 

Total, Environmental Program & Management 

$16,950.0 

$2,993,779.0 

$29,700.0 

$2,988,874.6 

$16,950.0 

$2,993,779.0 

$0.0 

$2,876,634.0 

($16,950.0) 

($117,145.0) 

Inspector General 

Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 

Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 

Total, Inspector General 

$44,791.0 

$44,791.0 

$49,164.4 

$49,164.4 

$44,791.0 

$44,791.0 

$45,997.0 

$45,997.0 

$1,206.0 

$1,206.0 

Building and Facilities 

Homeland Security 

Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and 

Infrastructure $8,070.0 $9,652.1 $8,070.0 $8,038.0 ($32.0) 

84
 

 

Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Operations and Administration 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Total, Building and Facilities 

$28,931.0 

$37,001.0 

$29,896.7 

$39,548.8 

$28,931.0 

$37,001.0 

$33,931.0 

$41,969.0 

$5,000.0 

$4,968.0 

Hazardous Substance Superfund 

Indoor Air and Radiation 

Radiation: Protection $2,495.0 $2,586.2 $2,495.0 $2,487.0 ($8.0) 

Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations 

Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations $9,975.0 $9,337.9 $9,975.0 $10,009.0 $34.0 

Compliance 

Compliance Incentives 

Compliance Monitoring 

Subtotal, Compliance 

$0.0 

$1,216.0 

$1,216.0 

$14.4 

$1,181.8 

$1,196.2 

$0.0 

$1,216.0 

$1,216.0 

$0.0 

$1,222.0 

$1,222.0 

$0.0 

$6.0 

$6.0 

Enforcement 

Environmental Justice 

Superfund: Enforcement 

Superfund: Federal Facilities Enforcement 

Criminal Enforcement 

Enforcement Training 

Forensics Support 

Subtotal, Enforcement 

$795.0 

$172,668.0 

$10,570.0 

$8,066.0 

$899.0 

$2,450.0 

$195,448.0 

$891.0 

$174,821.5 

$9,196.2 

$8,417.3 

$756.5 

$2,727.0 

$196,809.5 

$795.0 

$172,668.0 

$10,570.0 

$8,066.0 

$899.0 

$2,450.0 

$195,448.0 

$600.0 

$169,844.0 

$10,530.0 

$8,252.0 

$0.0 

$2,389.0 

$191,615.0 

($195.0) 

($2,824.0) 

($40.0) 

$186.0 

($899.0) 

($61.0) 

($3,833.0) 

Homeland Security 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection 

Decontamination 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure 

Protection (other activities) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure 

Protection 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and 

Recovery 

Decontamination 

Laboratory Preparedness and Response 

$198.0 

$1,562.0 

$1,760.0 

$10,798.0 

$9,626.0 

$89.6 

$1,179.9 

$1,269.5 

$6,087.1 

$5,111.1 

$198.0 

$1,562.0 

$1,760.0 

$10,798.0 

$9,626.0 

$0.0 

$0.0 

$0.0 

$5,908.0 

$5,635.0 

($198.0) 

($1,562.0) 

($1,760.0) 

($4,890.0) 

($3,991.0) 

85
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery (other activities) 

Subtotal, Homeland Security: Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery 

Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and 

Infrastructure 

Subtotal, Homeland Security 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

$33,156.0 

$53,580.0 

$1,194.0 

$56,534.0 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

$40,360.7 

$51,558.9 

$1,194.0 

$54,022.4 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

$33,156.0 

$53,580.0 

$1,194.0 

$56,534.0 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

$29,119.0 

$40,662.0 

$1,172.0 

$41,834.0 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

($4,037.0) 

($12,918.0) 

($22.0) 

($14,700.0) 

Information Exchange / Outreach 

Exchange Network $1,433.0 $1,438.6 $1,433.0 $1,433.0 $0.0 

IT / Data Management / Security 

Information Security 

IT / Data Management 

Subtotal, IT / Data Management / Security 

$785.0 

$17,087.0 

$17,872.0 

$524.3 

$16,498.3 

$17,022.6 

$785.0 

$17,087.0 

$17,872.0 

$728.0 

$15,352.0 

$16,080.0 

($57.0) 

($1,735.0) 

($1,792.0) 

Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 

Alternative Dispute Resolution 

Legal Advice: Environmental Program 

Subtotal, Legal / Science / Regulatory / Economic Review 

$893.0 

$746.0 

$1,639.0 

$863.5 

$658.7 

$1,522.2 

$893.0 

$746.0 

$1,639.0 

$927.0 

$750.0 

$1,677.0 

$34.0 

$4.0 

$38.0 

Operations and Administration 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Rent 

Utilities 

Security 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other 

activities) 

Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management 

Acquisition Management 

Human Resources Management 

Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance 

Subtotal, Operations and Administration 

$44,300.0 

$3,397.0 

$8,299.0 

$22,486.0 

$78,482.0 

$2,945.0 

$24,684.0 

$5,580.0 

$27,490.0 

$139,181.0 

$44,239.0 

$2,630.9 

$7,633.1 

$21,549.0 

$76,052.0 

$3,240.9 

$23,820.8 

$4,332.7 

$28,192.2 

$135,638.6 

$44,300.0 

$3,397.0 

$8,299.0 

$22,486.0 

$78,482.0 

$2,945.0 

$24,684.0 

$5,580.0 

$27,490.0 

$139,181.0 

$47,112.0 

$3,765.0 

$8,282.0 

$22,272.0 

$81,431.0 

$3,243.0 

$24,097.0 

$7,046.0 

$22,252.0 

$138,069.0 

$2,812.0 

$368.0 

($17.0) 

($214.0) 

$2,949.0 

$298.0 

($587.0) 

$1,466.0 

($5,238.0) 

($1,112.0) 

Research: Sustainable Communities 

Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities $21,264.0 $22,525.3 $21,264.0 $17,706.0 ($3,558.0) 

86
 

 

Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

Human Health Risk Assessment $3,404.0 $3,169.1 $3,404.0 $3,342.0 ($62.0) 

Superfund Cleanup 

Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal $202,330.0 $225,840.0 $202,330.0 $194,895.0 ($7,435.0) 

Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness $9,632.0 $9,667.5 $9,632.0 $9,263.0 ($369.0) 

Superfund: Federal Facilities $32,105.0 $33,605.0 $32,105.0 $26,242.0 ($5,863.0) 

Superfund: Remedial $605,438.0 $693,835.2 $605,438.0 $574,499.0 ($30,939.0) 

Superfund: Support to Other Federal Agencies $6,575.0 $6,575.0 $6,575.0 $5,858.0 ($717.0) 

Subtotal, Superfund Cleanup $856,080.0 $969,522.7 $856,080.0 $810,757.0 ($45,323.0) 

Total, Hazardous Substance Superfund $1,306,541.0 $1,414,791.3 $1,306,541.0 $1,236,231.0 ($70,310.0) 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

Enforcement 

Civil Enforcement $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $832.0 $832.0 

Compliance 

Compliance Assistance and Centers $797.0 $756.8 $797.0 $0.0 ($797.0) 

IT / Data Management / Security 

IT / Data Management $162.0 $152.3 $162.0 $0.0 ($162.0) 

Operations and Administration 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Rent $696.0 $696.0 $696.0 $696.0 $0.0 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other 

activities) $208.0 $175.9 $208.0 $220.0 $12.0 

Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations $904.0 $871.9 $904.0 $916.0 $12.0 

Acquisition Management $165.0 $172.4 $165.0 $163.0 ($2.0) 

Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance $1,115.0 $1,312.0 $1,115.0 $512.0 ($603.0) 

Subtotal, Operations and Administration $2,184.0 $2,356.3 $2,184.0 $1,591.0 ($593.0) 

Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 

LUST / UST $11,613.0 $17,901.7 $11,613.0 $11,982.0 $369.0 

LUST Cooperative Agreements $63,570.0 $55,963.6 $63,570.0 $63,192.0 ($378.0) 

87
Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

LUST Prevention 

Subtotal, Underground Storage Tanks (LUST / UST) 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

$34,430.0 

$109,613.0 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

$35,030.1 

$108,895.4 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

$34,430.0 

$109,613.0 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

$34,430.0 

$109,604.0 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

$0.0 

($9.0) 

Research: Sustainable Communities 

Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 

Total, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

$345.0 

$113,101.0 

$422.5 

$112,583.3 

$345.0 

$113,101.0 

$454.0 

$112,481.0 

$109.0 

($620.0) 

Inland Oil Spill Programs 

Compliance 

Compliance Assistance and Centers 

Compliance Monitoring 

Subtotal, Compliance 

$269.0 

$0.0 

$269.0 

$263.7 

$0.0 

$263.7 

$269.0 

$0.0 

$269.0 

$0.0 

$138.0 

$138.0 

($269.0) 

$138.0 

($131.0) 

Enforcement 

Civil Enforcement $1,998.0 $2,082.8 $1,998.0 $2,902.0 $904.0 

IT / Data Management / Security 

IT / Data Management $24.0 $24.0 $24.0 $0.0 ($24.0) 

Oil 

Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response $14,944.0 $13,494.8 $14,944.0 $19,472.0 $4,528.0 

Operations and Administration 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Rent 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations (other 

activities) 

Subtotal, Facilities Infrastructure and Operations 

Subtotal, Operations and Administration 

$438.0 

$67.0 

$505.0 

$505.0 

$438.0 

$51.4 

$489.4 

$489.4 

$438.0 

$67.0 

$505.0 

$505.0 

$438.0 

$98.0 

$536.0 

$536.0 

$0.0 

$31.0 

$31.0 

$31.0 

Research: Sustainable Communities 

Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities 

Total, Inland Oil Spill Programs 

$639.0 

$18,379.0 

$549.7 

$16,904.4 

$639.0 

$18,379.0 

$614.0 

$23,662.0 

($25.0) 

$5,283.0 

88
 

 

Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

State and Tribal Assistance Grants 

State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 

Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF $2,100,000.0 $1,695,365.8 $2,100,000.0 $1,550,000.0 ($550,000.0) 

Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF $1,387,000.0 $1,143,484.5 $1,387,000.0 $990,000.0 ($397,000.0) 

Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages $13,000.0 $16,634.7 $13,000.0 $10,000.0 ($3,000.0) 

Brownfields Projects $100,000.0 $133,697.0 $100,000.0 $99,041.0 ($959.0) 

Clean School Bus Initiative $0.0 $68.2 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 

Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program $60,000.0 $115,807.2 $60,000.0 $0.0 ($60,000.0) 

Targeted Airshed Grants $20,000.0 $10,000.0 $20,000.0 $0.0 ($20,000.0) 

Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border $17,000.0 $24,503.5 $17,000.0 $10,000.0 ($7,000.0) 

Subtotal, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) $3,697,000.0 $3,139,560.9 $3,697,000.0 $2,659,041.0 ($1,037,959.0) 

Categorical Grants 

Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection $9,900.0 $10,194.2 $9,900.0 $9,900.0 $0.0 

Categorical Grant: Brownfields $49,495.0 $56,100.7 $49,495.0 $49,495.0 $0.0 

Categorical Grant: Environmental Information $10,000.0 $10,618.9 $10,000.0 $10,200.0 $200.0 

Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial 

Assistance $103,346.0 $103,161.8 $103,346.0 $103,412.0 $66.0 

Categorical Grant: Homeland Security $0.0 $2,863.1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 

Categorical Grant: Lead $14,564.0 $15,162.6 $14,564.0 $14,855.0 $291.0 

Categorical Grant: Local Govt Climate Change $10,000.0 $9,500.0 $10,000.0 $0.0 ($10,000.0) 

Categorical Grant: Multi-Media Tribal Implementation $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $20,000.0 $20,000.0 

Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) $200,857.0 $194,818.5 $200,857.0 $164,757.0 ($36,100.0) 

Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement $18,711.0 $18,494.3 $18,711.0 $19,085.0 $374.0 

Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation $13,520.0 $13,195.4 $13,520.0 $13,140.0 ($380.0) 

Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106) 

Monitoring Grants $18,500.0 $18,314.0 $18,500.0 $11,300.0 ($7,200.0) 

Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 

106) (other activities) $210,764.0 $207,627.1 $210,764.0 $238,964.0 $28,200.0 

Subtotal, Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 

106) $229,264.0 $225,941.1 $229,264.0 $250,264.0 $21,000.0 

Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention $4,940.0 $4,484.8 $4,940.0 $5,039.0 $99.0 

Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision 

(PWSS) $105,700.0 $107,095.7 $105,700.0 $109,700.0 $4,000.0 

Categorical Grant: Radon $8,074.0 $8,572.4 $8,074.0 $8,074.0 $0.0 

Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality 

Management $226,580.0 $223,152.7 $226,580.0 $305,500.0 $78,920.0 

Categorical Grant: Sector Program $0.0 $202.6 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 

89
 

 

 

Program/Projects by Program Area 

Program/Projects by Program Area

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Program Area 

Appropriation 

Program/Project 

Sub-Program/ Project 

Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds 

Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance 

Categorical Grant: Tribal Air Quality Management 

Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program 

Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC) 

Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks 

Categorical Grant: Water Quality Cooperative 

Agreements 

Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development 

Subtotal, Categorical Grants 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget 

$0.0 

$5,099.0 

$13,300.0 

$62,875.0 

$10,891.0 

$2,500.0 

$0.0 

$16,830.0 

$1,116,446.0 

FY 2010 

Actuals 

$2,827.2 

$5,401.9 

$13,408.0 

$65,746.2 

$11,323.6 

$3,184.3 

$63.0 

$16,236.1 

$1,121,749.1 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR 

$0.0 

$5,099.0 

$13,300.0 

$62,875.0 

$10,891.0 

$2,500.0 

$0.0 

$16,830.0 

$1,116,446.0 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget 

$0.0 

$5,201.0 

$13,566.0 

$71,375.0 

$11,109.0 

$1,550.0 

$0.0 

$15,167.0 

$1,201,389.0 

Change FY10 

Enacted to 

FY12 PresBud 

$0.0 

$102.0 

$266.0 

$8,500.0 

$218.0 

($950.0) 

$0.0 

($1,663.0) 

$84,943.0 

Congressional Priorities 

Congressionally Mandated Projects 

Total, State and Tribal Assistance Grants 

$156,777.0 

$4,970,223.0 

$141,665.5 

$4,402,975.5 

$156,777.0 

$4,970,223.0 

$0.0 

$3,860,430.0 

($156,777.0) 

($1,109,793.0) 

SUBTOTAL, EPA (Excludes Rescission or Cancellation

of Prior Year Funds) 

$10,331,864.0 $9,842,520.0 $10,329,864.0 $9,023,000.0 ($1,308,864.0) 

Rescission or Cancellation of Prior Year Funds ($40,000.0) $0.0 ($40,000.0) ($50,000.0) ($10,000.0) 

SUBTOTAL, EPA $10,291,864.0 $9,842,520.0 $10,289,864.0 $8,973,000.0 ($1,318,864.0) 

Specified Infrastructure Grants: 

Hunter’s Point, California 1 

TOTAL, EPA + Specified Infrastructure Grants 

$8,000.0 

$10,299,864.0 

$8,000.0 

$9,850,520.0 

$8,000.0 

$10,297,864.0 

$0.0 

$8,973,000.0 

($8,000.0) 

($1,326,864.0) 

Notes: FY 2010 Actuals include obligations of carryover. 

FY 2010 Actuals include ARRA obligations. 

FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding 

supplemental appropriations. 

1 Hunter’s Point funds transferred to Department of the Navy 2nd Quarter FY 2010. 

90
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EPA Research and Development 

Transformational Solutions through Science Innovation 

EPA’s Office of Research and Development provides critical support to the Agency’s 

environmental policy decisions and regulatory actions to protect human health and the 

environment. EPA research has provided effective solutions to environmental problems 

for the past 40 years. The Agency’s research has informed risk reduction approaches 

that have resulted in cleaner air, land and water. However, today’s increasingly 

complex public health and environmental problems require an evolved approach to 

research. Scientific innovation is needed to produce transformational solutions beyond 

those more narrowly targeted to single chemicals or problems. 

To address these new challenges, in FY 2012 EPA is strengthening its planning and 

delivery of science by implementing an integrated research approach that looks at 

problems from a systems perspective. Research will leverage the diverse capabilities of 

in-house scientists and engineers and bridge traditional scientific disciplines. In 

addition, research plans will incorporate input from external stakeholders such as 

Federal, State, and local government agencies, non-governmental organizations, 

industry, and communities affected by environmental problems. 

EPA will implement this new approach by realigning and integrating the work of twelve 

of its base research programs into four new research programs: 

• Air, Climate, and Energy 

• Safe and Sustainable Water Resources 

• Sustainable and Healthy Communities 

• Chemical Safety and Sustainability 

This integration capitalizes on existing 

capabilities and promotes the use of a 

transdisciplinary perspective to further 

EPA’s mission. 

For example, available tools have failed 

to fully address complex aspects of 

chemical risk such as the impact of lifestage vulnerability, genetic susceptibility, disproportionate exposures, and cumulative 

risk. By formally integrating chemicals research, EPA will combine developments in 

computational, physico-chemical, and biological science to advance science in the 

sustainable development, use, and assessment of chemicals. 

Within the new integrated programs, EPA will continue research to address targeted, 

existing problems and provide technical support, with an emphasis on sustainable 

applications and outcomes. The Human Health Risk Assessment and Homeland 

Security Research programs also will continue as key components of EPA’s overall 

research portfolio. 

91
 

EPA Research and Development 

Office of Research and Development: 

NEW Program/Project Structure 1 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Appropriation Program/Project 

FY 2010 Enacted FY 2011 CR2 FY 2012 PresBud3 Delta: 12 PB - 10 EN 

$000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE 

Science & 

Technology 

Congressionally Mandated Projects $4,700 0.0 $4,700 0.0 $0 0.0 -$4,700 0.0 

Homeland Security: 

Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery 

Total Program $32,861 55.5 $32,861 55.5 $24,684 62.7 -$8,177 7.2 

Decontamination $20,890 40.2 $20,890 40.2 $15,637 44.0 -$5,253 3.8 

Safe Buildings $1,996 0.0 $1,996 0.0 $0 0.0 -$1,996 0.0 

Other Research $9,975 15.3 $9,975 15.3 $9,047 18.7 -$928 3.4 

Human Health Risk Assessment $42,899 167.6 $42,899 167.6 $42,400 180.9 -$499 13.3 

Research: Air, Climate 

and Energy 

Total Program $111,449 313.6 $111,449 313.6 $108,000 309.6 -$3,449 -4.0 

Global Change Research $20,822 35.5 $20,822 35.5 $20,805 41.2 -$17 5.7 

Clean Air Research $81,605 268.5 $81,605 268.5 $83,102 261.8 $1,497 -6.7 

Other Research $9,022 9.6 $9,022 9.6 $4,093 6.6 -$4,929 -3.0 

Research: Safe and 

Sustainable Water 

Resources 

Total Program $111,073 427.0 $111,073 427.0 $118,776 439.6 $7,703 12.6 

Drinking Water Research $49,129 190.2 $49,129 190.2 $52,521 196.2 $3,392 6.0 

Water Quality Research $61,944 236.8 $61,944 236.8 $66,255 243.4 $4,311 6.6 

Research: Sustainable 

and Healthy Communities 

Total Program $188,095 551.1 $186,095 551.1 $170,526 529.7 -$17,569 -21.4 

Human Health Research $54,180 106.7 $53,180 106.7 $45,392 112.2 -$8,788 5.5 

Ecosystems Research $71,698 272.4 $70,698 272.4 $60,905 255.7 -$10,793 -16.7 

Other Research $62,217 172.0 $62,217 172.0 $64,229 161.8 $2,012 -10.2 

Research: Chemical 

Safety and Sustainability 

Total Program $77,831 283.7 $77,831 283.7 $95,657 292.7 $17,826 9.0 

Endocrine Disruptors 

Research $11,350 50.1 $11,350 50.1 $16,883 46.1 $5,533 -4.0 

Computational Toxicology 

Research $20,044 32.7 $20,044 32.7 $21,209 34.4 $1,165 1.7 

Other Research $46,437 200.9 $46,437 200.9 $57,565 212.2 $11,128 11.3 

S&T Appropriation Total $568,908 1,798.5 $566,908 1,798.5 $560,043 1,815.2 -$8,865 16.7 

LUST Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities $345 1.9 $345 1.9 $454 1.6 $109 -0.3 

Inland Oil Spills Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities $639 0.9 $639 0.9 $614 0.9 -$25 0.0 

Superfund Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and 

Recovery $2,166 2.0 $2,166 2.0 $1,968 2.0 -$198 0.0 

Human Health Risk Assessment $3,404 14.9 $3,404 14.9 $3,342 14.9 -$62 0.0 

Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities $21,264 93.1 $21,264 93.1 $17,706 89.5 -$3,558 -3.6 

Superfund Appropriation Total $26,834 110.0 $26,834 110.0 $23,016 106.4 -$3,818 -3.6 

GRAND TOTAL $596,726 1,911.3 $594,726 1,911.3 $584,127 1,924.1 -$12,599 12.8 

1 FY 2010 Enacted includes the $2M supplemental for research to determine human health and environmental impacts of oil spill dispersants. 

Differences in totals between new and former program areas reflect transfers and cross-walk adjustments for workforce support costs.
 2

 FY 2011 CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
 3 FY 2012 total for Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities excludes $0.5M in Agency green conferencing resources not included as part of the 

Office of Research and Development budget.
 

92
 

 

EPA Research and Development 

Office of Research and Development: 

OLD Program/Project Structure 1 

(Dollars in Thousands) 

Appropriation Program/Project 

FY 2010 Enacted FY 2011 CR2 FY 2012 PresBud3 Delta: 12 PB - 10 EN 

$000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE 

Science & 

Technology 

Congressionally Mandated Projects $4,700 0.0 $4,700 0.0 $0 0.0 -$4,700 0.0 

Homeland Security: 

Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery 

Total Program $32,861 55.5 $32,861 55.5 $24,684 62.7 -$8,177 7.2 

Decontamination $20,890 40.2 $20,890 40.2 $15,637 44.0 -$5,253 3.8 

Safe Buildings $1,996 0.0 $1,996 0.0 $0 0.0 -$1,996 0.0 

Other Research $9,975 15.3 $9,975 15.3 $9,047 18.7 -$928 3.4 

Human Health Risk Assessment $44,789 173.7 $44,789 173.7 $44,108 187.4 -$681 13.7 

Research: Global Change $20,826 35.5 $20,826 35.5 $20,810 41.2 -$16 5.7 

Research: Clean Air $81,917 269.5 $81,917 269.5 $83,313 262.8 $1,396 -6.7 

Research: Drinking Water $49,155 190.2 $49,155 190.2 $52,547 196.2 $3,392 6.0 

Research: Water Quality $61,918 236.8 $61,918 236.8 $66,229 243.4 $4,311 6.6 

Research: Human Health 

and Ecosystems 

Total Program $161,511 484.9 $159,511 484.9 $145,444 475.0 -$16,067 -9.9 

Human Health Research $84,904 211.2 $83,904 211.2 $45,392 112.2 -$39,512 -99.0 

Ecosystems Research $76,607 273.7 $75,607 273.7 $60,905 255.7 -$15,702 -18.0 

Other Research 4 $0 0.0 $0 0.0 $39,147 107.1 $39,147 107.1 

Research: Land Protection and Restoration $14,111 58.8 $14,111 58.8 $13,601 57.3 -$510 -1.5 

Research: Fellowships $11,083 2.6 $11,083 2.6 $17,261 6.4 $6,178 3.8 

Research: Sustainability $27,287 70.8 $27,287 70.8 $26,788 67.0 -$499 -3.8 

Research: Pesticides and Toxics $27,347 137.4 $27,347 137.4 $27,159 135.3 -$188 -2.1 

Research: Endocrine Disruptors $11,355 50.1 $11,355 50.1 $16,888 46.1 $5,533 -4.0 

Research: Computational Toxicology $20,048 32.7 $20,048 32.7 $21,211 34.4 $1,163 1.7 

S&T Appropriation Total $568,908 1,798.5 $566,908 1,798.5 $560,043 1,815.2 -$8,865 16.7 

LUST Research: Land Protection and Restoration $345 1.9 $345 1.9 $454 1.6 $109 -0.3 

Inland Oil Spills Research: Land Protection and Restoration $639 0.9 $639 0.9 $614 0.9 -$25 0.0 

Superfund Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and 

Recovery $2,166 2.0 $2,166 2.0 $1,968 2.0 -$198 0.0 

Human Health Risk Assessment $3,404 14.9 $3,404 14.9 $3,342 14.9 -$62 0.0 

Research: Sustainability $73 0.0 $73 0.0 $0 0.0 -$73 0.0 

Research: Land Protection and Restoration $21,191 93.1 $21,191 93.1 $17,706 89.5 -$3,485 -3.6 

Superfund Appropriation Total $26,834 110.0 $26,834 110.0 $23,016 106.4 -$3,818 -3.6 

GRAND TOTAL $596,726 1,911.3 $594,726 1,911.3 $584,127 1,924.1 -$12,599 12.8 

1 FY 2010 Enacted includes the $2M supplemental for research to determine human health and environmental impacts of oil spill dispersants. 

Differences in totals between new and former program areas reflect transfers and cross-walk adjustments for workforce support costs.
 2

 FY 2011 CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations.
 3 FY 2012 total for Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities excludes $0.5M in Agency green conferencing resources not included as part of the 

Office of Research and Development budget.
 4

 FY 2012 resources for nanotechnology and other areas will now appear separately from the Human Health and Ecosystems research areas.
 

93
94
 

 Categorical Grants 

Categorical Program Grants (STAG) 

by National Program and State Grant 

(Dollars in Thousands)

FY 2011 Delta 

FY 2010 FY 2010 Annualized FY 2012 FY 12 PB ­

NPM / Grant Enacted Actuals CR PresBud FY 10 EN % Change 

Air & Radiation 

State and Local Assistance $226,580 $223,153 $226,580 $305,500 $78,920 34.8% 

Tribal Air Quality Management $13,300 $13,408 $13,300 $13,566 $266 2.0% 

Radon $8,074 $8,572 $8,074 $8,074 $0 0.0% 

Local Government Climate Change $10,000 $9,500 $10,000 $0 ($10,000) -100.0% 

$257,954 $254,633 $257,954 $327,140 $69,186 26.8% 

Water 

Pollution Control (Section 106) $229,264 $225,941 $229,264 $250,264 $21,000 9.2% 

Beaches Protection $9,900 $10,194 $9,900 $9,900 $0 0.0% 

Nonpoint Source (Section 319) $200,857 $194,819 $200,857 $164,757 ($36,100) -18.0% 

Wetlands Program Development $16,830 $16,236 $16,830 $15,167 ($1,663) -9.9% 

Targeted Watersheds $0 $2,827 $0 $0 $0 0.0% 

Water Quality Cooperative Agreements $0 $63 $0 $0 $0 0.0% 

$456,851 $450,080 $456,851 $440,088 ($16,763) -3.7% 

Drinking Water 

Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) $105,700 $107,096 $105,700 $109,700 $4,000 3.8% 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) $10,891 $11,324 $10,891 $11,109 $218 2.0% 

Homeland Security $0 $2,863 $0 $0 $0 0.0% 

$116,591 $121,282 $116,591 $120,809 $4,218 3.6% 

Hazardous Waste 

H.W. Financial Assistance $103,346 $103,162 $103,346 $103,412 $66 0.1% 

Brownfields $49,495 $56,101 $49,495 $49,495 $0 0.0% 

Underground Storage Tanks $2,500 $3,184 $2,500 $1,550 ($950) -38.0% 

$155,341 $162,447 $155,341 $154,457 ($884) -0.6% 

Pesticides & Toxics 

Pesticides Program Implementation $13,520 $13,195 $13,520 $13,140 ($380) -2.8% 

Lead $14,564 $15,163 $14,564 $14,855 $291 2.0% 

Toxic Substances Compliance $5,099 $5,402 $5,099 $5,201 $102 2.0% 

Pesticides Enforcement $18,711 $18,494 $18,711 $19,085 $374 2.0% 

$51,894 $52,254 $51,894 $52,281 $387 0.7% 

Multimedia 

Environmental Information $10,000 $10,619 $10,000 $10,200 $200 2.0% 

Pollution Prevention $4,940 $4,485 $4,940 $5,039 $99 2.0% 

Sector Program (Enf & Comp Assurance) $0 $203 $0 $0 $0 0.0% 

Tribal General Assistance Program $62,875 $65,746 $62,875 $71,375 $8,500 13.5% 

Tribal Implementation $0 $0 $0 $20,000 $20,000 0.0% 

$77,815 $81,053 $77,815 $106,614 $28,799 37.0% 

Total Categorical Grants $1,116,446 $1,121,749 $1,116,446 $1,201,389 $84,943 7.6% 

NOTES: Totals may not add due to rounding.

 FY 2010 Actuals include obligations of carryover.
 

95
96
 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

Categorical Grants Program (STAG) 

(Dollars in millions) 

$1,006 

$1,079 

$1,143 $1,168 $1,137 $1,113 $1,113 $1,078 $1,095 $1,116 $1,116 $1,201 

$0 

$200 

$400 

$600 

$800 

$1,000 

$1,200 

$1,400 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
 

EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN EN CR PB
 

*Does not account for rescissions or cancellation.
 

*EN – Enacted, PB – President’s Budget, CR – Annualized Continuing Resolution (represents an 

annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted levels excluding supplemental
 

appropriations.
 

Categorical Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests a total of $1.201 billion for 20 “categorical” program grants for 

state, interstate organizations, non-profit organizations, intertribal consortia, and tribal 

governments. EPA will continue to pursue its strategy of building and supporting state, 

local and tribal capacity to implement, operate, and enforce the nation’s environmental 

laws. Most environmental laws envision establishment of a decentralized nationwide 

structure to protect public health and the environment. In this way, environmental goals 

will ultimately be achieved through the actions, programs, and commitments of state, 

tribal and local governments, organizations and citizens. 

The Agency is proposing a new multimedia grant to tribal governments in FY 2012 to 

facilitate environmental program implementation on tribal lands. This new grant will 

support tribes as they move beyond capacity building to program implementation. 

Also, to strengthen grants management, EPA, working with the states, has issued a 

new policy that replaces the State Grant Performance Measures Template. The policy is 

intended to 1) enhance accountability for achieving grant performance objectives; 2) 

ensure that State grants are aligned with the Agency’s Strategic Plan; and 3) provide for 

more consistent performance reporting. To achieve those objectives, the policy 

requires that state categorical grant workplans and associated progress reports 

97
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

prominently display three “Essential Elements: the EPA Strategic Plan Goal; the EPA 

Strategic Plan Objective; and workplan commitments plus time frame. Regions and 

states will begin to transition to the new policy in FY 2012 with the goal of 100% 

compliance for all grants awarded on or after October 1, 2012. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to offer flexibility to state and tribal governments to 

manage their environmental programs as well as provide technical and financial 

assistance to achieve mutual environmental goals. First, EPA and its state and tribal 

partners will continue implementing the National Environmental Performance 

Partnership System (NEPPS). NEPPS is designed to allow states more flexibility to 

operate their programs, while increasing emphasis on measuring and reporting 

environmental improvements. Second, Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) will 

continue to allow states and tribes funding flexibility to combine categorical program 

grants to address environmental priorities. 

HIGHLIGHTS: 

State & Local Air Quality Management, Radon, and Tribal Air Quality 

Management Grants 

The FY 2012 request includes $327.1 million for grants to support state, local, and tribal 

air management and radon programs, an increase of $79.2 million. Grant funds for 

State and Local Air Quality Management and Tribal Air Quality Management are 

requested in the amounts of $305.5 million and $13.6 million, respectively. These funds 

provide resources to multi-state, state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies for 

the development and implementation of programs for the prevention and control of air 

pollution and for the implementation of National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) set to protect public health and the environment. In FY 2012, EPA will 

continue to work with state and local air pollution control agencies to develop or 

implement state implementation plans (SIPs) for NAAQS (including the 8-hour ozone 

standard, the fine particle (PM-2.5) standard, the lead standard) and also for regional 

haze. In addition, EPA will continue support of state and local operation of the 27-site 

National Air Toxics Trends Stations network. In FY 2012, states with approved or 

delegated permitting programs will continue to implement new greenhouse gas 

requirements as part of their permitting programs. 

EPA will work with federally-recognized tribal governments nationwide to continue 

development and implementation of tribal air quality management programs. Tribes are 

active in protection of air quality for the 4 percent of the land mass of the United States 

over which they have sovereignty, and work closely with EPA to monitor and report air 

quality information from over 300 monitors. Lastly, this request includes $8.1 million for 

Radon grants to continue funding priority activities that reduce health risks. These 

activities include reducing radon levels in existing homes and promoting the 

construction of new homes with radon reducing features. 

98
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

Water Pollution Control (Clean Water Act Section 106) Grants 

The FY 2012 EPA request includes $250.3 million for Water Pollution Control grants. 

The $21 million increase will strengthen the base state, interstate and tribal programs, 

address water quality issues such as nutrients and new program requirements, and 

support expanded water monitoring and enforcement efforts. This grant program assists 

state and tribal efforts to restore and maintain the quality of the nation’s water quality 

standards, improving water quality monitoring and assessment, implementing Total 

Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and other watershed-related plans, strengthening the 

National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, 

implementing practices to reduce pollution from all nonpoint sources, and supporting 

sustainable water infrastructure. EPA will work with states to implement the new rules 

governing discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and will 

continue to revise the stormwater regulations to better protect the nation’s waters from 

stormwater discharges. EPA intends to propose more protective standards on 

discharges from newly developed and redeveloped sites. States and authorized tribes 

will continue to review and update their water quality standards as required by the Clean 

Water Act. EPA encourages states to continually review and update the water quality 

criteria in their standards to reflect the latest scientific information from EPA and other 

sources. EPA’s goal for FY 2012 is that 64.3 percent of states will have updated their 

standards to reflect the latest scientific information in the past three years. In FY 2012, 

$18.5 million will be designated for states and tribes that participate in collecting 

statistically valid water monitoring data and implement enhancements in their water 

monitoring programs. 

Wetlands Grants 

In FY 2012, the request includes $15.2 million for Wetlands Program grants, which 

provide technical and financial assistance to the states, tribes, and local governments. 

These grants support development of state and tribal wetland programs that further the 

goals of the CWA and improve water quality in watersheds throughout the country. 

Public Water System Supervision Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $109.7 million for Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) 

grants. These grants provide assistance to implement and enforce National Primary 

Drinking Water Regulations to ensure the safety of the Nation's drinking water 

resources and to protect public health. In FY 2012, The Agency is requesting an 

additional $4 million to support state data management, improve data quality, and allow 

the public access to compliance monitoring data not previously available. The 

increased funding will support associated program support costs or in-kind assistance 

for the benefit of states working in concert with the Agency to collect and display all 

compliance monitoring data as part of implementing the Drinking Water Strategy. This 

will improve transparency and efficiency as it will replace the Safe Drinking Water 

Information System/State Version (SDWIS/State) and reduce the need for state 

resources to maintain individual compliance databases. 

99
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $11.1 million for the Underground Injection Control grants 

program. Ensuring safe underground injection of waste materials and other fluids is a main 

component of a comprehensive source water protection program. Grants are provided to 

states that have primary enforcement authority (primacy) to implement and maintain UIC 

programs. EPA and the states will continue to address wells of all classes determined 

to be in violation of the UIC regulations and will close or permit Motor Vehicle Waste 

Disposal wells (Class V) that are identified during FY 2012. Authorized states will 

implement a new rule finalized in December 2010 that establishes a new class of 

underground injection well – Class VI – with new federal requirements to allow the 

injection of CO2 for the purpose of Geological Sequestration (GS), facilitating the 

permitting of large scale commercial carbon sequestration in FY 2012. 

BEACH Act Grants 

The FY 2012 request includes $9.9 million for the 35 states, territories, and eligible 

tribes with Great Lakes or coastal shorelines to protect public health at the nation's 

beaches. The Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act (BEACH 

Act) of October 2000 authorizes EPA to award grants to help eligible states, territories 

and tribes develop and implement beach bacteria monitoring and notification programs. 

These programs inform the public about the risk of exposure to disease-causing 

microorganisms in coastal waters (including the Great Lakes). 

Non-Point Source Program Grants (NPS – Clean Water Act Section 319) 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $164.8 million for Nonpoint Source Program grants to states, 

territories, and tribes. These grants enable states to use a range of tools to implement 

their programs including: both non-regulatory and regulatory programs, technical 

assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, and 

demonstration projects. This request level represents a reduction that will decrease 

funding for nonpoint source projects, one of the choices the Agency made to meet 

federal deficit reduction goals. The request also eliminates the statutory one-third of 

one-percent cap on Clean Water Act Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution grants that 

may be awarded to tribes. In FY 2012, EPA will begin to implement some program 

reforms, including incentives to states to implement more effective nonpoint source 

management programs. 

Tribal General Assistance Program Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA will provide $71.4 million in GAP grants, an increase of $8.5 million, to 

help build tribal environmental capacity to assess environmental conditions, utilize 

available information, and build an environmental program tailored to tribes’ needs. The 

grants will develop tribal environmental education and outreach programs, promote 

coordination between federal, state, local and tribal environmental officials, and alert 

100
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

EPA to serious conditions that pose immediate public health and ecological threats. 

This additional funding of $8.5 million will allow 45 more tribes, for a total universe of 

574 tribes and intertribal consortia, to have the opportunity to access an environmental 

presence. 

Multi-Media Tribal Implementation Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $20.0 million for a new multi-media grant program, which will be 

tailored to address an individual tribe’s most serious environmental needs through the 

implementation of environmental programs and projects. These grants will build upon the 

environmental capacity developed under the Indian General Assistance Program (GAP), 

but will focus on transitioning a tribe into program implementation. This new program is 

designed to be flexible and will allow tribes to work with EPA to collaboratively identify high 

priority areas for individual tribes and target grant resources to address those critical needs. 

The multi-media grant program will facilitate self-government, ensure that environmental 

priorities on Tribal lands are addressed to the fullest extent possible, and help fulfill 

EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment in Indian country. 

Pesticide Enforcement and Toxics Substance Compliance Grants 

The FY 2012 request includes $24.3 million to build environmental enforcement 

partnerships with states and tribes and to strengthen their ability to address 

environmental and public health threats. The enforcement state grants request consists 

of $19.1 million for Pesticides Enforcement and $5.2 million for Toxic Substances 

Enforcement Grants. State and tribal enforcement grants will be awarded to assist in 

the implementation of compliance and enforcement provisions of the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA). These grants support state and tribal compliance activities to protect the 

environment from harmful chemicals and pesticides. 

Under the Pesticides Enforcement Grant program, EPA provides resources to states 

and Indian tribes to conduct FIFRA compliance inspections and take appropriate 

enforcement actions and implement programs for farm worker protection. The program 

also sponsors training for state and tribal inspectors through the Pesticide Inspector 

Residential Program (PIRT) and for state and tribal managers through the Pesticide 

Regulatory Education Program (PREP). Under the Toxic Substances Compliance 

Grant program, “non-waiver” states inspect on behalf of EPA and receive funding for 

compliance inspections of asbestos and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and "waiver" 

states inspect under their own regulations and receive funding for compliance 

inspections and enforcement of the asbestos program. States also receive funding for 

implementation of the state lead-base paint certification and training, abatement 

notification and work practice standards compliance and enforcement program. The 

funds will complement other Federal program grants for building state capacity for lead 

abatement, and enhancing compliance with disclosure, certification and training 

requirements. 

101
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

Pesticides Program Implementation Grants 

The FY 2012 request includes $13.1 million for Pesticides Program Implementation 

grants. These resources will assist states, tribes, and partners with pesticide worker 

safety activities, protection of endangered species and water sources, and promotion of 

environmental stewardship approaches to pesticide use. EPA’s mission as related to 

pesticides is to protect human health and the environment from pesticide risk and to 

realize the value of pesticide availability by considering the economic, social and 

environmental costs and benefits of the use of pesticides. Pesticides Program 

Implementation Grants help state programs stay current with changing requirements. 

Lead Grants 

The FY 2012 request includes $14.9 million for lead grants. This funding will support 

assistance to states, territories, the District of Columbia, and tribes to develop and 

implement authorized programs for the lead-based paint abatement program to operate 

in lieu of the federal program. Additionally, the program will provide support to those 

entities to develop and implement authorized Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) 

Programs. EPA implements these programs in all areas of the country that are not 

authorized to do so. Activities conducted as part of this program include accrediting 

training programs, certifying individuals and firms, and providing education and 

compliance assistance to those subject to the abatement and RRP regulations and the 

general public. Another activity that this funding will support is the collection of lead data 

to determine the nature and extent of the lead problem within an area so that states, 

tribes and the Agency can better target remaining areas of high risk. 

EPA recognizes that additional attention and assistance must be given to vulnerable 

populations including those with rates of lead poisoning in excess of the national 

average. In FY 2012, EPA will continue to award Targeted Grants to Reduce Childhood 

Lead Poisoning. These grants are available to a wide range of applicants, including 

state and local governments, Federally-recognized Indian tribes and intertribal 

consortia, territories, institutions of higher learning, and nonprofit organizations. 

Funding in this program is also used to track the disparities in blood lead levels between 

low-income children and non-low-income children. The program uses the data collected 

to track progress toward eliminating childhood lead poisoning in these vulnerable 

populations. 

Pollution Prevention Grants 

The FY 2012 request includes $5.0 million for Pollution Prevention grants. The program 

provides grant funds to deliver technical assistance to small and medium-sized 

businesses. The goal is to assist businesses and industries with identifying improved 

environmental strategies and solutions for reducing waste at the source. The program 

demonstrates that source reduction can be a cost-effective way of meeting or exceeding 

102
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorical Grants 

Federal and state regulatory requirements. In FY 2012, EPA is targeting a reduction of 

1.1 billion pounds of hazardous materials, saving $847 million, conserving 27.8 billion 

gallons of water, and reducing 6.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. 

Environmental Information Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $10.2 million to continue the Environmental Information 

Exchange Network (EN) grant program. These resources will support the development 

and exchange of regulatory and non-regulatory data flows and expand data sharing 

among partners. The request level will grow the EN by developing the necessary 

capacity and infrastructure for tribes and territories, including new tools for EN partners 

that make exchanging data faster and easier. Grant funding will support multi-partner 

projects to plan, mentor and train EN partners and develop and exchange data. 

Additionally, these resources will promote sharing and integration of 

geographic/geospatial information and geospatial data standards with environmental 

information, as the legacy methods for reporting data are replaced by the Network. 

State and Tribal Underground Storage Tanks Program 

The FY 2012 request includes $1.6 million for Underground Storage Tank (UST) grants. 

In FY 2012, EPA will make grants to states under Section 2007 of the Solid Waste 

Disposal Act, available to support core program activities as well as the leak prevention 

activities under Title XV, Subtitle B of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue to focus attention on the need to bring all UST systems 

into compliance with release detection and release prevention requirements, and 

implement the provisions of EPAct. States will continue to use the UST categorical grant 

funding to implement their leak prevention and detection programs. Specifically with 

these UST categorical grants, states will fund such activities as: Seeking state program 

approval to operate the UST program in lieu of the Federal program, approving specific 

technologies to detect leaks from tanks, ensuring that tank owners and operators are 

complying with notification and other requirements, ensuring equipment compatibility, 

conducting inspections, implementing operator training, prohibiting delivery for noncomplying facilities, and requiring secondary containment or financial responsibility for 

tank manufacturers and installers. 

Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $103.4 million for Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance 

grants. Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance grants are used for the implementation 

of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste program, 

which includes permitting, authorization, waste minimization, enforcement, and 

corrective action activities. In FY 2012, EPA expects to increase the number of 

hazardous waste facilities with new or updated controls to prevent releases by 100 

facilities. 

103
 

 

Categorical Grants 

By the end of FY 2012, EPA and the authorized states also will control human 

exposures to contamination at 72 percent of the 2020 universe of 3,746 facilities that 

may need cleanup under the RCRA Corrective Action Program. EPA also will control 

migration of contaminated groundwater at 64 percent of these facilities, and complete 

the construction of final remedies at 38 percent of these facilities. 

Brownfields Grants 

In FY 2012, EPA requests $49.5 million to continue the Brownfields grant program that 

provides assistance to states and tribes to develop and enhance their state and Tribal 

response programs. This funding will help states and tribes develop legislation, 

regulations, procedures, and guidance, to establish or enhance the administrative and 

legal structure of their response programs. 

104
 

 

 

SRF Obligations by State 

Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) Resources 

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Resources 

State-by-State distribution of Actual and Estimated Obligations 

Fiscal Years 2010 to 2012 – Dollars in Thousands 

The following tables show state-by-state distribution of resources for EPA’s two 

largest State and Tribal Grant Programs, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund 

and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. These tables do not reflect total 

resources that EPA provides to individual states. 

105
 

 

 

SRF Obligations by State 

Infrastructure Assistance: 

Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF)

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

STATE 

ACT. 

OBLIG. 

EST. 

OBLIG. 

EST. 

OBLIG. 

Alabama $23,013.0 $23,013.0 $16,985.0 

Alaska $12,317.0 $12,317.0 $9,091.0 

American Samoa $12,733.8 $11,129.0 $8,229.0 

Arizona $24,336.3 $13,901.0 $10,260.0 

Arkansas $13,463.0 $13,463.0 $9,937.0 

California $150,463.0 $147,193.0 $108,640.0 

Colorado $16,463.0 $16,463.0 $12,151.0 

Connecticut $342.0 $25,213.0 $18,609.0 

Delaware $13,381.7 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

District of Columbia $9,117.4 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Florida $69,471.0 $69,471.0 $51,275.0 

Georgia 

Guam 

$34,797.0 

$1,565.4 

$34,797.0 

$8,052.0 

$25,683.0 

$5,955.0 

Hawaii $5,223.5 $15,940.0 $11,765.0 

Idaho $10,103.0 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Illinois $93,390.9 $93,080.0 $68,700.0 

Indiana $49,441.4 $49,600.0 $36,608.0 

Iowa $279.0 $27,854.0 $20,558.0 

Kansas $186.0 $18,577.0 $13,711.0 

Kentucky $262.0 $26,194.0 $19,333.0 

Louisiana $7,682.1 $22,624.0 $16,699.0 

Maine $15,932.0 $15,932.0 $11,759.0 

Maryland $49,777.0 $49,777.0 $36,739.0 

Massachusetts $69,876.0 $69,876.0 $51,573.0 

Michigan $885.0 $88,493.0 $65,315.0 

Minnesota $37,827.0 $37,827.0 $27,919.0 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

$18,542.0 

$19,534.8 

$18,542.0 

$57,054.0 

$13,686.0 

$42,110.0 

Montana $10,103.0 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Nebraska $105.0 $10,527.0 $7,770.0 

Nevada $13,377.3 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

New Hampshire $206.0 $20,567.0 $15,180.0 

New Jersey $84,102.0 $84,102.0 $62,074.0 

New Mexico $8,518.8 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

New York $227,170.0 $227,170.0 $167,662.0 

North Carolina $49,178.2 $37,144.0 $27,415.0 

North Dakota $100.0 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Northern Mariana Islands $5,645.6 $5,172.0 $3,825.0 

Ohio $386.9 $115,861.0 $85,514.0 

Oklahoma $22,311.5 $16,627.0 $12,272.0 

Oregon $23,289.0 $23,249.0 $17,160.0 

Pennsylvania 

Puerto Rico 

$130,208.1 

$0.0 

$81,524.0 

$26,843.0 

$60,171.0 

$19,812.0 

Rhode Island $18,334.3 $13,819.0 $10,200.0 

South Carolina $213.9 $21,084.0 $15,562.0 

South Dakota $10,103.0 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Tennessee $29,897.0 $29,897.0 $22,066.0 

Texas $125,168.8 $94,067.0 $69,428.0 

Utah $10,844.0 $10,844.0 $8,004.0 

Vermont $13,377.3 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Virgin Islands, U.S. $100.0 $6,459.0 $4,776.0 

Virginia $42,184.4 $42,119.0 $31,087.0 

Washington $35,791.0 $35,791.0 $26,416.0 

West Virginia $31,970.6 $32,083.0 $23,680.0 

Wisconsin $556.0 $55,639.0 $41,066.0 

Wyoming $10,187.9 $10,103.0 $7,457.0 

Tribal Resources $29,032.2 $42,000.0 $31,000.0 

Undistributed National Resources $2,498.6 $0.0 $0.0 

TOTAL: $1,695,365.7 $2,100,000.0 $1,550,000.0 

Notes: Estimated Obligations are based on an annualized Continuing Resolution for FY 2011 and the FY 2012 President’s Budget. 

There is a discrepancy between the FY 2010 IA, KS, NE, MO, Tribal Resources, and Undistributed amounts and the 

amounts in the Analytical Perspectives volume of the President’s Budget. 

106
 

 

 

SRF Obligations by State 

Infrastructure Assistance:
 

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF)

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

STATE 

ACT. 

OBLIG. 

EST. 

OBLIG. 

EST. 

OBLIG. 

Alabama $16,823.0 $16,823.0 $12,001.0 

Alaska $21,719.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

American Samoa $2,259.0 $2,057.0 $1,467.0 

Arizona $33,057.8 $27,259.0 $19,445.0 

Arkansas $10,229.0 $20,539.0 $14,652.0 

California $128,102.1 $126,958.0 $90,568.0 

Colorado $24,074.0 $24,074.0 $17,173.0 

Connecticut $8,146.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Delaware $0.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

District of Columbia $16,132.2 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Florida $0.0 $44,316.0 $31,613.0 

Georgia $32,071.0 $32,071.0 $22,878.0 

Guam $935.0 $5,138.0 $3,665.0 

Hawaii $8,146.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Idaho $13,573.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Illinois $51,040.0 $51,230.0 $36,545.0 

Indiana $22,738.0 $22,638.0 $16,149.0 

Iowa $10,148.0 $23,169.0 $16,528.0 

Kansas $165.0 $16,605.0 $11,845.0 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

$0.0 

$17,954.3 

$19,592.0 

$25,649.0 

$13,976.0 

$18,297.0 

Maine $13,573.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Maryland $18,409.4 $21,059.0 $15,022.0 

Massachusetts $25,303.0 $25,303.0 $18,050.0 

Michigan $41,226.0 $41,226.0 $29,409.0 

Minnesota $23,219.1 $22,776.0 $16,247.0 

Mississippi $14,125.0 $14,125.0 $10,076.0 

Missouri $15,816.0 $26,234.0 $18,714.0 

Montana $20,245.2 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Nebraska $13,573.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Nevada $21,719.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

New Hampshire $8,146.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

New Jersey $28,995.0 $28,995.0 $20,684.0 

New Mexico $5,265.3 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

New York $89,427.0 $89,427.0 $63,793.0 

North Carolina $27,414.0 $35,593.0 $25,390.0 

North Dakota $2,600.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Northern Mariana Islands $6,652.0 $6,148.0 $4,386.0 

Ohio $0.0 $43,610.0 $31,109.0 

Oklahoma $17,170.5 $16,863.0 $12,029.0 

Oregon $25,485.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Pennsylvania $45,528.3 $39,766.0 $28,367.0 

Puerto Rico $8,146.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Rhode Island $8,146.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

South Carolina $762.3 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

South Dakota $13,573.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Tennessee $15,084.0 $15,084.0 $10,760.0 

Texas $86,254.0 $86,254.0 $61,530.0 

Utah $13,573.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Vermont $8,146.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Virgin Islands, U.S. $0.0 $7,016.0 $5,005.0 

Virginia $23,008.0 $23,008.0 $16,413.0 

Washington $34,650.0 $34,650.0 $24,718.0 

West Virginia $21,269.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Wisconsin $0.0 $23,399.0 $16,692.0 

Wyoming $13,573.0 $13,573.0 $9,682.0 

Tribal Resources $15,596.2 $27,740.0 $19,800.0 

Undistributed National Resources $499.8 $2,000.0 $2,000.0 

TOTAL: $1,143,484.5 $1,387,000.0 $990,000.0 

Notes: Estimated Obligations are based on an annualized Continuing Resolution for FY 2011 and the FY 2012 President’s Budget. 

There is a discrepancy between the FY 2010 IA, KS, NE, and MO amounts and the amounts in the Analytical Perspectives 

volume of the President’s Budget. 

107
108
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Financing 

Infrastructure / STAG Project Financing

(Dollars in Thousands) 

FY 2011 

FY 2010 Annualized 

Type / Grant Enacted CR 

FY 2012 

PresBud
 

Delta 

FY 12 PB – 

FY 10 EN 

Clean Water State Revolving Fund $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $1,550,000 -$550,000 

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund $1,387,000 $1,387,000 $990,000 -$397,000 

State Revolving Funds $3,487,000 $3,487,000 $2,540,000 -$947,000 

Mexico Border $17,000 $17,000 $10,000 -$7,000 

Alaska Native Villages $13,000 $13,000 $10,000 -$3,000 

Special Needs Projects $30,000 $30,000 $20,000 -$10,000 

Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant 

Program $60,000 $60,000 $0.0 -$60,000 

Targeted Airshed Grants $20,000 $20,000 $0.0 -$20,000 

Brownfields Projects $100,000 $100,000 $99,041 -$959 

Specified Infrastructure Grants $156,777 $156,777 $0.0 -$156,777 

Infrastructure Assistance Total $3,853,777 $3,853,777 $2,659,041 -$1,194,736 

Hunter’s Point, California $8,000 $8,000 $0 -$8,000 

Total: Infrastructure Assistance + 

Specified Infrastructure Grants for 

Hunter’s Point $3,861,777 $3,861,777 $2,659,041 -$1,202,736 

Note: FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 

Enacted levels excluding supplemental appropriations. 

Infrastructure and Special Projects Funds 

The 2012 President’s Budget includes a total of $2.7 billion for EPA’s Infrastructure 

programs in the State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) account. This budget 

continues funding for the SRFs at $2.5 billion, following unprecedented increases 

provided in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010. 

Infrastructure and targeted projects funding under the STAG appropriation provides 

financial assistance to states, municipalities, interstates, and tribal governments to fund 

a variety of drinking water, wastewater, air and Brownfields environmental projects. 

109
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Financing 

These funds help fulfill the federal government’s commitment to help our state, tribal 

and local partners obtain adequate funding to construct the facilities required to comply 

with federal environmental requirements and ensure public health and revitalize 

contaminated properties. 

Providing STAG funds to capitalize State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs, EPA works 

in partnership with the states to provide low-cost loans to municipalities for infrastructure 

construction. All drinking water and wastewater projects are funded based on state 

developed priority lists. Through SRF set-asides, grants are available to Indian tribes 

and U.S. territories for infrastructure projects. 

The resources included in this budget will enable the Agency, in conjunction with EPA’s 

state, local, and tribal partners, to achieve important goals for 2012, for example: 

- 91 percent of the population served by community water systems will receive 

drinking water meeting all health-based standards. 

Capitalizing Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds 

The Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund programs demonstrate a 

true partnership between states, localities and the federal government. These 

programs provide federal financial assistance to states, localities, and tribal 

governments to protect the nation’s water resources by providing funds for the 

construction of drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities. The state revolving 

funds are two important elements of the nation’s substantial investment in sewage 

treatment and drinking water systems, which provides Americans with significant 

benefits in the form of reduced water pollution and safe drinking water. 

EPA will continue to provide financial assistance for wastewater and other water 

projects through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). CWSRF projects 

include nonpoint source, estuary, stormwater, and sewer overflow projects. The 

dramatic progress made in improving the quality of wastewater treatment since the 

1970s is a national success. In 1972, only 84 million people were served by secondary 

or advanced wastewater treatment facilities. As of 2008 (from most recent Clean 

Watersheds Needs Survey), over 99 percent of community wastewater treatment 

plants, serving 222.6 million people, use secondary treatment or better. Water 

infrastructure projects supported by the program contribute to direct ecosystem 

improvements by lowering the amount of nutrients and toxic pollutants in all types of 

surface waters. While great progress has been made, many rivers, lakes and 

ocean/coastal areas still suffer an enormous influx of pollutants after heavy rains. The 

contaminants result in beach closures, infect fish and degrade the ability of the 

watersheds to sustain a healthy ecosystem. 

The FY 2012 request includes $1.55 billion in funding for the CWSRF. Approximately 

$33 billion has been appropriated as of FY 2010 to capitalize the CWSRF. Total 

CWSRF funding available for loans since 1988 through June 2008, reflecting loan 

110
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Financing 

repayments, state match dollars, and other funding sources, exceeds $84 billion. EPA 

estimates that for every federal dollar contributed, more than two dollars are provided to 

municipalities. 

Since its inception in 1997, the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program 

has made available $21.05 billion to finance 8,358 infrastructure improvement projects 

nationwide, with an average of $1.77 made available to localities for every $1 of federal 

funds invested. As of June 30, 2010, $12.4 billion in capitalization grants have been 

awarded, amounting to loans/assistance of $20 billion. The DWSRF helps offset the 

costs of ensuring safe drinking water supplies and assists small communities in meeting 

their responsibilities. 

For FY 2012, EPA requests not more than 30 percent of the CWSRF funds be made 

available to each state to be used to provide additional subsidy to eligible recipients in 

the form of forgiveness of principle, negative interest loans, or grants (or a combination 

of these). This provision would only apply to the portion of the appropriation that 

exceeds $1 billion. EPA is also requesting, to the extent there are sufficient eligible 

project applications, that not less than 20 percent of a portion of a CWSRF capitalization 

grant and 10 percent of a portion of a DWSRF grant be made available for projects, or 

portion of projects, that include green infrastructure, water or energy efficiency 

improvements or other environmentally innovative activities. 

As part of the Administration’s long-term strategy, EPA is implementing a Sustainable 

Water Infrastructure Policy that focuses on working with states and communities to 

enhance technical, managerial and financial capacity. Important to the technical 

capacity will be enhancing alternatives analysis to expand "green infrastructure" options 

and their multiple benefits. Future year budgets for the SRFs gradually adjust, taking 

into account repayments, through 2016 with the goal of providing, on average, about 5 

percent of water infrastructure spending annually. When coupled with increasing 

repayments from loans made in past years by states, the annual funding will allow the 

SRFs to finance a significant percentage in clean water and drinking water 

infrastructure. Federal dollars provided through the SRFs will act as a catalyst for 

efficient system-wide planning and ongoing management of sustainable water 

infrastructure. Overall, the Administration requests a combined $2.5 billion for the SRFs. 

Set-Asides for Tribes and Territories: To improve public health and water quality on 

tribal lands, the Agency is requesting increases to the tribal set asides in the CWSRF 

and DWSRF from 1.5 percent to up to 2 percent. EPA also is requesting an increase to 

the SRF set aside for territories from 0.25 percent to up to 1.5 percent for the CWSRF 

and from 0.33 percent for the DWSRF to up to 1.5 percent. EPA is also requesting 

transfer authority between the Clean Water Indian Set-Aside Grant and Drinking Water 

Infrastructure Grants Tribal Set-Aside Program. 

111
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Financing 

Alaska Native Villages 

The President’s Budget provides $10 million for Alaska native villages for the 

construction of wastewater and drinking water facilities to address serious sanitation 

problems. EPA will continue to work with the Department of Health and Human 

Services’ Indian Health Service, the State of Alaska, the Alaska Native Tribal Health 

Council, and local communities to provide needed financial and technical assistance. 

Brownfields Projects 

The President’s Budget includes $99 million for Brownfields projects. With the FY 2012 

request, EPA plans to focus resources on the Brownfields area-wide planning effort 

which will fund approximately 20 area-wide planning projects, with a combination of 

grant and technical assistance funding, at a maximum level of $350 thousand per 

project. In addition EPA will fund an estimated 82 assessment cooperative agreements 

and 96 direct cleanup cooperative agreements. EPA will also support cleanup of 

approximately 45 sites contaminated by petroleum or petroleum products and award an 

estimated $2.6 million in environmental job training grants. In FY 2012, the funding 

provided is expected to result in the assessment of 1,000 Brownfields properties. Using 

EPA grant dollars, the Brownfields grantees will leverage 5,000 cleanup and 

redevelopment jobs and $900 million in cleanup and redevelopment funding. 

The successful implementation of Brownfields Area-Wide Planning projects is one of 

EPA’s Priority Goals. In FY 2010, EPA set a Priority Goal to initiate 20 Brownfields 

area-wide planning projects that will include community-level efforts to benefit underserved and economically disadvantaged communities. The projects will allow those 

communities to assess and address a single large or multiple brownfields properties 

within their boundaries, thereby enabling redevelopment of brownfields properties on a 

broader scale. 

For the 23 community-level projects that were actually selected, EPA will provide 

technical assistance, coordinate its water and air quality enforcement efforts, and work 

with other federal agencies, states, tribes and local governments to implement 

associated targeted environmental improvements identified in each community's areawide plan. This Priority Goal reflects emphasis on both environmental health and 

protection and economic development and job creation through the redevelopment of 

Brownfields properties, particularly in underserved and disadvantaged communities. 

The Brownfields projects funding also supports participation in the Administration-wide 

initiative, the America’s Great Outdoors (AGO), by promoting the planning of urban 

parks and greenways on once abandoned or scarred lands. 

Mexico Border 

The President’s Budget includes a total of $10 million for water infrastructure projects 

along the U.S.-Mexico Border. The goal of this program is to reduce environmental and 

human health risks along the U.S.-Mexico Border. EPA’s U.S.-Mexico Border program 

112
 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Financing 

provides funds to support the planning, design and construction of high priority water 

and wastewater treatment projects along the border. The Agency’s goal is to provide 

protection of people in the U.S.-Mexico border area from health risks by connecting 

homes to potable water supply and wastewater collection and treatment systems. 

113
114
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trust Funds 

Trust Funds 

(Dollars in Millions) 

Trust Funds Program 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

Budget1 

FY 2011 

Annualized 

CR1, 2 

FY 2012 

President’s 

Budget1 

$ FTE $ FTE $ FTE 

Superfund $1,270 3,018 $1,270 3,018 $1,203 2,900 

Inspector General (Transfers) $10 66 $10 66 $10 66 

Research & Development 

(Transfers) $27 110 $27 110 $23 106 

Superfund Total $1,307 3,193 $1,307 3,193 $1,236 3,072 

Base Realignment and 

Closure 3 $0 65 $0 65 $0 28 

LUST 4 $113 75 $113 75 $112 64 

Trust Funds Total5: $1,420 3,344 $1,420 3,344 $1,349 3,187 

1 Totals may not add due to rounding.
 2 FY 2011 Annualized CR represents an annualized continuing resolution based on FY 2010 Enacted 

levels excluding supplemental appropriations.

3 Funding for reimbursable FTE provided by the Department of Defense via an Interagency Agreement.
 4 EPAct Grants for Prevention activities are included in the FY 2010 Enacted, FY 2011 Annualized CR,
 

and FY 2012 President’s Budget.

5 Trust Funds Total includes reimbursable FTE for Base Realignment and Closure as well as other 

Superfund reimbursable FTE. 

Superfund 

In FY 2012, the President’s Budget requests a total of $1,236 million in discretionary 

budget authority and 3,072 FTE for Superfund. This funding level will address 

environmental and public health risks resulting from releases or threatened releases of 

hazardous substances associated with any emergency site, as well as the 13,556 active 

Superfund National Priorities List (NPL) and non-NPL sites. It also ensures that 

responsible parties conduct cleanups, preserving federal dollars for sites where there 

are no viable contributing parties. As of the end of FY 2010, 96 percent of the 1,627 

sites on the NPL are either undergoing cleanup construction, are completed, or are 

deleted. 

Of the total funding requested for Superfund, $811 million and 1,372 FTE are for 

Superfund cleanups. The Agency’s Superfund remedial and removal programs address 

public health and environmental threats from uncontrolled releases of hazardous 

substances. The Agency expects to demonstrate significant progress in reducing risks 

115
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trust Funds 

to human health and the environment. In FY 2012, EPA and its partners anticipate 

completing construction activities at 22 Superfund NPL sites to achieve the overall goal 

of 1,145 total construction completions by the end of FY 2012. 

The Agency works with several Federal agencies that provide essential services in 

areas where the Agency does not possess the specialized expertise. In FY 2012, other 

Federal agencies, including the United States Coast Guard, the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, and the Department of the Interior, will provide support to 

the Agency for Superfund cleanups. 

Of the total funding requested, $193 million and 1,037 FTE are for Superfund 

enforcement related activities. One of the Superfund program’s primary goals is to have 

responsible parties pay for and conduct cleanups at abandoned or uncontrolled 

hazardous waste sites. The Agency focuses on maximizing all aspects of Potentially 

Responsible Party (PRP) participation; including reaching a settlement with or taking an 

enforcement action by the time of a Remedial Action start at 99 percent of non-Federal 

Facility Superfund sites. 

CERCLA authorizes the Agency to retain and use funds received pursuant to an 

agreement with a PRP to carry out the agreement. EPA retains such funds in special 

accounts, which are sub-accounts in EPA’s Superfund Trust Fund. EPA uses special 

account funds to finance site-specific CERCLA response actions at the site for which 

the account was established. Through the use of special accounts, EPA pursues its 

“enforcement first” policy – ensuring responsible parties pay for cleanup – so that 

appropriated resources from the Superfund Trust Fund are conserved for sites where 

no viable or liable PRPs have been identified. Both special account resources and 

appropriated resources are critical to the Superfund program. 

The FY 2012 President’s Budget also includes resources supporting Agency-wide 

resource management and control functions. This includes essential infrastructure, 

contract and grant administration, and financial accounting and other fiscal operations. 

In addition, the Agency provides funds for Superfund program research and for auditing. 

The President’s Budget requests $23 million and 106 FTE to be transferred to Research 

and Development. Research will enable EPA’s Superfund program to accelerate 

scientifically defensible and cost-effective decisions for cleanup at complex 

contaminated Superfund sites. The Superfund research program is driven by program 

office needs to reduce the cost of cleaning up Superfund sites, improve the efficiency of 

characterizing and remediating sites, and reduce the scientific uncertainties for 

improved decision-making at Superfund sites. The President’s Budget also requests 

$10 million and 66 FTE to be transferred to the Inspector General for program auditing. 

There are still sites where no viable PRP has been identified and many activities that 

EPA performs that are not otherwise reimbursed. For this reason, the FY 2012 Budget 

supports reinstatement of the Superfund tax. The Superfund tax on petroleum, 

chemical feedstock and corporate environmental income expired in 1995. Since the 

116
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trust Funds 

expiration of Superfund tax, Superfund program funding (the “Superfund appropriation”) 

has been largely financed from General Revenue transfers to the Superfund Trust 

Fund, thus burdening the general public with the costs of cleaning up hazardous waste 

sites. Reinstating the Superfund taxes would provide a stable, dedicated source of 

revenue for the Superfund Trust Fund and restore the historic nexus that parties who 

benefit from the manufacture and sale of substances found in hazardous waste sites 

contribute to the cost of cleanup. The reinstated Superfund taxes are estimated to 

generate a revenue level of approximately $1.6 billion beginning in January 2012 to 

more than $2.6 billion annually by 2021. Total tax revenue over the period 2012 to 2021 

is predicted to be $23.5 billion. The revenues will be placed in the Superfund Trust Fund 

and would be available for appropriation from Congress to support the assessment and 

cleanup of the Nation’s highest risk sites within the Superfund program. 

Base Realignment and Closure Act 

The FY 2012 President’s Budget requests 28 reimbursable FTE to conduct the Base 

Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program (BRAC I-IV). EPA’s participation in the first 

four rounds of BRAC has been funded by an interagency agreement which expires on 

September 30, 2011. Since 1993, EPA has worked with the Department of Defense 

(DOD) and state environmental programs to make property environmentally acceptable 

for transfer, while protecting human health and the environment at realigning or closing 

military installations. Between 1988 and 2005, over 500 major military installations 

representing the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Defense Logistics Agency have been 

slated for realignment or closure. Under the first four rounds of BRAC (BRAC I-IV), 107 

of those sites were identified as requiring accelerated cleanup. EPA has participated in 

the acceleration process of the first four rounds of BRAC. The accelerated cleanup 

process strives to make parcels available for reuse as quickly as possible, by transfer of 

uncontaminated or remediated parcels, lease of contaminated parcels where cleanup is 

underway, or “early transfer” of contaminated property undergoing cleanup. Seventytwo Federal facilities currently listed on the NPL were identified under the fifth round of 

BRAC (BRAC V) as closing, realigning, or gaining personnel. 

The FY 2012 request does not include support for BRAC-related services to DOD at 

BRAC V facilities. If EPA services are required at levels above its base for BRAC V 

installations, the Agency will require reimbursement from DOD for the costs the Agency 

incurs to provide those additional services. 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

The FY 2012 President’s Budget requests $112 million and 64 FTE for the Leaking 

Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program. The Agency, working with states and 

tribes, addresses public health and environmental threats from releases through 

prevention and cleanup activities. As required by law (42 U.S.C. 6991c(f)), not less 

than 80 percent of LUST appropriated funds will be used in cooperative agreements for 

states and tribes to carry out specific purposes. EPA will continue to work with the 

states to achieve more cleanups, and reduce the backlog of over 93,000 cleanups not 

yet completed. Between 1986 and 2010, the LUST program addressed 81 percent (or 

117
 

 

 

 

 

 

Trust Funds 

401,874) of all reported releases. In FY 2012, working with state partners the LUST 

program will strive to achieve 12,400 cleanups, including 42 cleanups in Indian Country, 

that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration. 

The LUST Trust Fund financing tax was most recently reauthorized in the Energy Policy 

Act of 2005 and unless reauthorized the tax will expire on September 30, 2011. The FY 

2012 Budget supports the "polluter pays" principle and proposes to continue the LUST 

Trust Fund financing tax which provides more than $180 million in tax receipts to the 

Trust Fund annually. While tank owners and operators are liable for the cost of 

cleanups at sites for which they have responsibility, EPA and State regulatory agencies 

are not always able to identify responsible parties and sometimes responsible parties 

are no longer financially viable or have a limited ability to pay. In those cases, the best 

option is to distribute the cost of the cleanup among fuel users through the targeted fuel 

tax, which would be available for appropriation from Congress to support the prevention 

and cleanup of sites within the LUST program. Annually, the Trust Fund receives more 

than $180 million in tax receipts. 

118
 

 

Acronyms 

Environmental Protection Agency
 

List of Acronyms
 AA Assistant Administrator 

ACE/ITDS Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data System 

ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution 

ARA Assistant Regional Administrator 

ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 

B&F Buildings and Facilities 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CAFO Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations 

CAIR Clean Air Interstate Rule 

CAP Clean Air Partnership Fund 

CARE Community Action for a Renewed Environment 

CBEP Community-Based Environmental Protection 

CBP Customs and Border Protection 

CCAP Climate Change Action Plan 

CCS Carbon Capture and Storage 

CCTI Climate Change Technology Initiative 

CEIS Center for Environmental Information and Statistics 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

CG Categorical Grant 

CSI Common Sense Initiative 

CSO Combined Sewer Overflows 

CWA Clean Water Act 

CWAP Clean Water Action Plan 

DBP Disinfection Byproducts 

DFAS Defense Finance and Accounting System 

DfE Design for the Environment 

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 

EJ Environmental Justice 

ELP Environmental Leadership Project 

EN Enacted (Budget) 

EPAct Energy Policy Act of 2005 

EPCRA Emergency Preparedness and Community Right-to-Know Act 

EPM Environmental Programs and Management 

ERRS Emergency Rapid Response Services 

ESC Executive Steering Committee 

ETI Environmental Technology Initiative 

ETV Environmental Technology Verification 

FAN Fixed Account Numbers 

FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 

FCO Funds Certifying Officer 

FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act 

FLC Federal Leadership Committee 

FMFIA Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act 

FQPA Food Quality Protection Act 

FSMP Financial System Modernization Project 

FTE Full-Time Equivalent 

119
 

 

Acronyms 

GAPG General Assistance Program Grants 

GHG Greenhouse Gas 

GLRI Great Lakes Restoration Initiative 

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act 

HPPG High Priority Performance Goals 

HPV High Production Volume 

HS Homeland Security 

HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 

HWIR Hazardous Waste Identification Media and Process Rules 

IAG Interagency Agreements 

ICR Information Collection Rule 

IFMS Integrated Financial Management System 

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

IRM Information Resource Management 

ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 

ITMRA Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1995-AKA Clinger/Cohen Act 

LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

M&O Management and Oversight 

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology 

MTM Mountaintop Mining 

NAAQs National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement 

NAPA National Academy of Public Administration 

NAS National Academy of Sciences 

NATA National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment 

NCDC National Clean Diesel Campaign 

NDPD National Data Processing Division 

NEP National Estuary Program 

NEPPS National Environmental Performance Partnership System 

NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

NIPP National Infrastructure Protection Plan 

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology 

NOA New Obligation Authority 

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

NPDWRs National Primary Drinking Water Regulations 

NPL National Priority List 

NPM National Program Manager 

NPR National Performance Review 

NPS Nonpoint Source 

OA Office of the Administrator 

OAM Office of Acquisition Management 

OAR Office of Air and Radiation 

OARM Office of Administration and Resources Management 

OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

OCHP Office of Children’s Health Protection 

OCSPP Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention 

OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

OEI Office of Environmental Information 

OERR Office of Emergency and Remedial Response 

OFA Other Federal Agencies 

120
 

 

 

 

 

 

Acronyms 

OFPP Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

OGC Office of General Counsel 

OIG Office of Inspector General 

OITA Office of International and Tribal Affairs 

OMTR Open Market Trading Rule 

OPAA Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability 

ORD Office of Research and Development 

OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

OTAG Ozone Transport Advisory Group 

OW Office of Water 

PB President’s Budget 

PBTs Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics 

PC&B Personnel, Compensation and Benefits 

PM Particulate Matter 

PNGV Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles 

POTWs Publicly Owned Treatment Works 

PPG Performance Partnership Grants 

PRC Program Results Code 

PRIA Pesticide Registration Improvement Act 

PRIRA Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act 

PWSS Public Water System Supervision 

RC Responsibility Center 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 

R&IE Radiation and Indoor Environments National Laboratory 

RMP Risk Management Plan 

RPIO Responsible Planning Implementation Office 

RR Reprogramming Request 

RRP Renovation, Repair and Painting 

RWTA Rural Water Technical Assistance 

S&T Science and Technology 

SALC Sub-allocation (level) 

SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizations Act of 1986 

SBO Senior Budget Officer 

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act 

SDWIS Safe Drinking Water Information System 

SITE Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation 

SLC Senior Leadership Council 

SRF State Revolving Fund 

SRO Senior Resource Official 

STAG State and Tribal Assistance Grants 

STORS Sludge-to-Oil-Reactor 

SWP Source Water Protection 

SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule 

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load 

TRI Toxic Release Inventory 

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act 

UIC Underground Injection Control 

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme 

UST Underground Storage Tanks 

121
Acronyms 

WCF Working Capital Fund 

WIF Water Infrastructure Funds 

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Project 

WSI Water Security Initiative 

122

United States Environmental Protection Agency
 

www.epa.gov