Table of Contents 

Introduction and Overview: 

EPA’s Mission and Goals................................................................................................iii 

Annual Plan and Budget Overview.................................................................................. v 

Goals: 

Goal 1: Clean Air And Global Climate Change............................................................1-1 

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water ....................................................................................2-1 

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration ................................................................3-1 

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems ..........................................................4-1 

Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship .................................................5-1 

Appendices: 

Categorical Grants Program........................................................................................ A-1 

Infrastructure Financing............................................................................................... B-1 

Trust Funds ................................................................................................................. C-1

Budget Tables: 

Agency Resources by Appropriation...................................................................... D-1 

Agency Resources by Goal ................................................................................... D-2 

Agency Workforce by Goal ................................................................................... D-3 

Program Projects ................................................................................................... D-4 

List of Acronyms...........................................................................................................E-1
This page intentionally left blank 
EPA’s Missions and Goals 

iii 

EPA’s Missions and Goals

EPA’s Mission 

The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect and safeguard 

human health and the environment, with a new focus on collaboration and partnerships with our 

Geographic and Regional partners. This budget supports the Administration’s commitment to 

environmental results -- making the air cleaner, water purer, and better protecting our land. The 

Agency’s proposal for FY 2005 also reflects our primary goal of compliance with national 

standards, which support neighborhood solutions. It will enable the Agency to take a giant step 

toward national market-based solutions, boosting our nation to the next level of environmental 

protection. 

EPA’s Goals 

EPA has five strategic, long-term goals in its Strategic Plan that guide the Agency’s 

planning, budgeting, analysis, accountability, and implementation processes. 

1. Clean Air and Global Climate Change: EPA will protect and improve the air so it is 

healthy to breathe and risks to human health and the environment are reduced. EPA will 

reduce greenhouse gas intensity by enhancing partnerships with businesses and other 

sectors. 

EPA and its partners will protect human health and the environment by attaining and 

maintaining health-based air-quality standards and reducing the risk from toxic air 

pollutants, and will encourage voluntary actions to improve indoor air in homes, schools, 

and office buildings. Through worldwide action, ozone concentrations in the 

stratosphere will improve, reducing the risk to human health from overexposure to 

ultraviolet radiation. EPA and its partners will also work to minimize unnecessary 

releases of radiation and be prepared to minimize impacts should unwanted releases 

occur. In addition, EPA will provide and apply sound science and conduct leading-edge 

research in support of air programs. 

2. Clean and Safe Water: EPA will ensure drinking water is safe. EPA will also restore 

and maintain oceans, watersheds, and their aquatic ecosystems to protect human 

health, support economic and recreational activities, and provide healthy habitat for fish, 

plants, and wildlife. 

EPA will protect human health by reducing exposure to contaminants in drinking water, 

in fish and shellfish, and in recreational waters. EPA will also protect the quality of 

rivers, lakes, and streams on a watershed basis, and protect coastal and ocean waters. 

EPA’s water program will be supported by providing and applying a sound scientific 

foundation through the conduct of leading-edge research and development of a better 

understanding and characterization of the environmental outcomes. 

3. Land Preservation and Restoration: EPA will preserve and restore the land by using 

innovative waste management practices and cleaning up contaminated properties to 

reduce risks posed by releases of harmful substances. 
EPA’s Missions and Goals

iv 

EPA will reduce waste generation, increase recycling, and ensure proper management 

of waste and petroleum products at facilities in ways that prevent releases. EPA will 

also work to control the risks to human health and the environment by mitigating the 

impact of accidental or intentional releases and by cleaning up and restoring 

contaminated sites. EPA’s land preservation and restoration efforts will be supported by 

the application of sound science and the conduct of leading-edge research. 

4. Healthy Communities and Ecosystems: EPA will protect, sustain, or restore the 

health of people, communities, and ecosystems using integrated and comprehensive 

approaches and partnerships. 

EPA will prevent and reduce potential pesticide, chemical, and genetically-engineered 

biological organism risks to humans, communities, and ecosystems. EPA will work to 

protect, sustain, and restore the health of communities, natural habitats, and 

ecosystems, including brownfield sites, the United States-Mexico border, wetlands, and 

specific ecosystems such as the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, and Gulf of Mexico. 

The Agency will work to enhance the Nation’s capability to prevent, detect, and recover 

from acts of terror through research, enhanced data collection and sharing, and 

provision of technical support to infrastructure. In addition, EPA will provide a sound 

scientific foundation for protecting, sustaining, and restoring the health of people, 

communities, and ecosystems through leading-edge research. 

5. Compliance and Environmental Stewardship: EPA will improve environmental 

performance through compliance with environmental requirements, preventing pollution, 

and promoting environmental stewardship. EPA will protect human health and the 

environment by encouraging innovation and providing incentives for governments, 

businesses, and the public that promote environmental stewardship. Additional funds 

and resources provided in 2004 and continued into 2005 will allow resumption of 

targeted inspections and enforcement activities in both the civil and criminal context. 

EPA will maximize compliance through compliance assistance, compliance incentives, 

and enforcement. EPA will also work to improve environmental protection and enhance 

natural resource conservation on the part of government, business, and the public 

through the adoption of pollution prevention and sustainable practices, the reduction of 

regulatory barriers, and the application of results-based, innovative, and multimedia 

approaches. In addition, EPA will assist Federally recognized tribes in assessing the 

condition of their environment, help build their capacity to implement environmental 

programs, and carry out programs in Indian country where needed to address 

environmental issues. EPA will also strengthen the scientific evidence and research 

supporting environmental policies and decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, 

and environmental stewardship. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

v 

Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

The EPA’s FY 2005 Annual Plan and Budget requests $7.8 billion in discretionary 

budget authority and 17,904 Full Time Equivalents (FTE). This budget request supports the 

Agency’s core programs and implementation of critical components of the President’s 

Management Agenda. Additionally, this request emphasizes the importance of adequate 

resources and vision necessary to reach our Nation’s environmental goals. Resources also 

support the Agency’s efforts to work with its partners toward protecting air, water, and land, as 

well as providing for EPA’s role in safeguarding the Nation from terrorist acts. The request 

supports the Administration’s commitment to setting high environmental protection standards, 

while focusing on results and performance, and achieving goals outlined in the President’s 

Management Agenda. 

 This Annual Plan and Budget submission demonstrates EPA’s commitment to protecting 

human health and the environment, building and enhancing relationships with our Geographic 

and Regional partners, and improving environment results. EPA’s budget request places a 

strong emphasis on working with stakeholders to protect human health. For example, the 

Agency requests $65 million for grants to retrofit the Nation’s school buses with cleaner 

technologies, thereby reducing diesel emissions. The budget will also assist our state and local 

partners in meeting national environmental quality standards. EPA requests $20 million and 

$45 million respectively to support the Agency’s request for Water Quality Monitoring and the 

Great Lakes Legacy Act. These efforts exhibit EPA’s commitment to collaborative 

environmental protection. 

Clean Air and Global Climate Change

 The FY 2005 President’s Budget expands EPA's Clean School Bus USA program to $65 

million in grant funding for projects that reduce diesel emissions from school buses through bus 

retrofit or replacement. Clean School Bus USA helps ensure that school buses – which are the 

safest way for kids to get to school – also are the cleanest possible transportation for this 

generation of school children. EPA initially launched the program in April 2003 using $5 million 

in grant funding. The initial grant offering garnered 120 grant applications from every region of 

the country totaling nearly $60 million in requests and offering some $36 million in matching 

resources. EPA supported 17 of these projects with the given resources. By expanding this 

program, additional resources are available to communities for localized solutions that address 

an issue important to children and parents across the nation. 

The Clear Skies initiative draws 

on EPA’s experience to modernize the 

Clean Air Act. Using a market-based 

approach, the Clear Skies initiative will 

dramatically reduce power plant 

emissions of three of the most 

significant air pollutants—sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and mercury. Reductions 

in SO2 and NOx emissions will also reduce airborne fine particulate matter (PM2.5), which is 

The number of people living in areas with monitored 

ambient ozone concentrations below the NAAQS for 

the one-hour ozone standard will increase by 4% for 

a cumulative total of 53%. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

vi 

associated with these two pollutants. EPA’s approach builds upon the success of the acid rain 

cap-and-trade program created by the Clean Air Act amendments in 1990. The Clear Skies 

initiative will achieve substantially greater reductions in air pollution from power plants more 

quickly and with more certainty than the existing Clean Air Act. The initiative requires 

mandatory reductions of SO2, NOx, and mercury (Hg) by an average of 70% from today’s levels 

and ensures that these levels are achieved and sustained through caps on emissions. EPA has 

also proposed an Interstate Air Quality Rule that also utilizes a cap and trade program to reduce 

SO2 and NOx as well as a proposed Utility Mercury Reductions Rule that seeks comments on 

two approaches for reducing the estimated 48 tons of mercury currently emitted each year by 

coal-burning power plants in the United States. Despite these reductions, some states will need 

to implement further measures to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). To 

help states and localities develop cost-effective strategies, EPA also will need to provide 

assistance to states to implement reductions. One approach is to strengthen air models by 

developing emission factors and improving emission inventories. 

A key to achieving the Clean Air Goal is $313.0 million included in this budget for air 

grants that support states and tribes. This total includes resources to assist states, tribes and 

local governments in devising additional stationary and mobile source strategies to reduce 

ozone, particulate matter, and other pollutants. 

The Agency will develop strategies and 

rules to help states and tribes reduce emissions 

and exposure to hazardous air pollutants, 

particularly in urban areas, and reduce harmful 

deposition in water bodies. 

EPA’s air research program will continue to provide a strong scientific basis for policy 

and regulatory decisions and explore emerging problem areas. 

Climate Change 

This budget request includes $130.1 

million to meet the Agency’s climate change 

objectives by working with business and other 

sectors to deliver multiple benefits – from cleaner 

air to lower energy bills – while improving overall 

scientific understanding of climate change and its 

potential consequences. The core of EPA’s climate change efforts are government/industry 

partnership programs designed to capitalize on the tremendous opportunities available to 

consumers, businesses, and organizations to make sound investments in efficient equipment 

and practices. These programs help remove barriers in the marketplace, resulting in faster 

deployment of technology into the residential, commercial, transportation, and industrial sectors 

of the economy. 

Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced 

from projected levels by approximately 90 

MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships 

with businesses, schools, state and local 

governments, and other organizations. 

Air toxics emissions nationwide from 

stationary and mobile sources combined will 

be reduced by an additional 1% of the 

updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for 

a cumulative reduction of 38%. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

vii 

Clean and Safe Water

Over the 30 years since enactment of the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Acts, 

government, citizens, and the private sector have worked together to make dramatic progress in 

improving the quality of surface waters and drinking water. 

 Thirty years ago, much of the nation’s tap water had either very limited treatment or no 

treatment at all. About two-thirds of the surface waters assessed by states were not attaining 

basic water quality goals and were considered polluted. Some of the Nation’s waters were open 

sewers posing health risks, and many waterbodies were so polluted that traditional uses, such 

as swimming, fishing, and recreation were impossible. 

 Today drinking water systems 

monitor and treat water to assure 

compliance with drinking water 

standards applicable to a wider range 

of contaminants. In addition, drinking 

water sources are now protected, which 

reduces treatment costs in the long run. 

The number of polluted waters has 

been dramatically reduced and many 

clean waters are even healthier. A 

massive investment of Federal, state, and local funds resulted in a new generation of 

wastewater treatment facilities able to provide “secondary” treatment or better. Discharges from 

over 50 different categories of industries are now regulated and efforts to implement ‘best 

management practices’ have helped reduce runoff of pollutants from diffuse or ‘nonpoint’ 

sources. 

 In FY 2005, EPA will focus on four strategies toward achieving the Nation’s clean and 

safe water goals. To better address the complexity of the remaining water quality challenges, 

EPA will promote local watershed approaches to execute the best and most cost effective 

solutions to local and regional water problems. To protect and build on the gains of the past, 

EPA will focus on its core water programs. To maximize the impact of each dollar, EPA will 

continue to strengthen vital partnerships with states, tribes and local governments, and others 

working toward the common goal of improving the Nation’s waters. To leverage progress 

through innovation, EPA will promote water quality trading, water efficiency, and other market 

based approaches. 

In FY 2005, to further support states and tribes in implementing CWA programs, EPA is 

making a significant investment in water quality monitoring to strengthen and upgrade state 

programs through state grants, improved data management systems and improved monitoring 

tools. 

EPA’s water research program will continue to provide a strong scientific basis for policy 

and regulatory decisions and explore emerging problem areas. 

By 2005, using both pollution prevention and 

restoration approaches, so that 500 of the Nation's 

watersheds, water quality standards are met in at least 

80% of the assessed water segments.

By 2005 the percentage of the population served by 

community water systems will receive drinking water 

that meets health-based standards with which systems 

need to comply as of December 2001 will be 94%.
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

viii 

Water Quality Monitoring

The FY 2005 water quality monitoring investment will be a major step toward solving the 

well-documented shortcomings of the Nation’s water quality monitoring. EPA can make the 

most of scarce resources through information-based management, using tools such as 

prevention, source water protection, watershed trading, and permitting on watershed basis. 

Monitoring is the foundation of information-based management and it is imperative that the data 

and information gaps be closed as quickly as possible. To strengthen and upgrade water 

quality monitoring programs across the country, EPA proposes two components: State grants 

targeted specifically to enhance state monitoring programs as well as support and enhancement 

of state data management systems. 

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) and Storm Water

 States are struggling with implementation of the NPDES permitting programs, as shown 

by withdrawal petitions and permit backlogs. Compounding the problem is that the regulated 

universe has increased by tenfold due to new requirements for concentrated animal feeding 

operations and storm water runoff. Additional resources in the form of state grants will assist 

states in implementing the NPDES CAFO programs and issuing storm water permits. 

Water Quality Trading

In FY 2005 EPA will advance water quality trading in voluntary partnerships on a 

watershed basis. It capitalizes on economies of scale and cost differences among sources. 

Trading allows one source to meet its regulatory obligations by using pollutant reductions 

gained by another source and provides incentives for voluntary reductions at a reduced cost to 

all. It encourages earlier and/or greater reductions than required, more cost effective programs, 

and incentives for innovative solutions to complex water quality problems. 

Water Efficiency

Growing populations place increasing demands on water sources. In addition, the 

nation faces a multi-billion dollar gap between water and wastewater infrastructure needs over 

the next 20 years. The touchstone of a long-term strategy to manage and maintain water and 

wastewater infrastructure is sustainability. An important component of that strategy is promoting 

sustainable systems. EPA will work in partnership with the states, utility industry and others to 

enhance the operating efficiencies of systems. These efficiencies will help systems make 

necessary investments to meet growing demand and sustain gains made over the past three 

decades. EPA will also help mitigate the infrastructure needs by investing in efforts to reduce 

water demand and wastewater flows, allowing for deferral or downsizing of capital projects. 

Added benefits to reduced demand include: maintaining streamflows, protecting aquatic habitat, 

avoiding overdrawn aquifers, and conserving supply sources. 

Land Preservation and Restoration

This budget continues a commitment to clean up toxic waste sites with $1.4 billion for 

Superfund. The Agency will also work to maximize the participation of responsible parties in 

site cleanups while promoting fairness in the enforcement process. EPA will continue the 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

ix 

progress we have made in cleaning up toxic waste sites while protecting public health and 

returning land to productive use. As of January 6, 2004, approximately 700 cleanup 

construction projects were underway at over 430 Superfund National Priority List (NPL) sites 

construction was complete on over 890 sites, or 59% of NPL sites. EPA has completed all final 

cleanup plans at over 1,100 NPL sites, undertaken 7,900 removals at hazardous waste sites to 

immediately reduce human health and environmental threats, assessed over 45,300 sites, and 

removed more than 33,400 sites from the national toxic waste site list to help promote the 

economic redevelopment of these properties. The waste research program continues to 

support the Agency’s objective of reducing or controlling potential risks to human health and the 

environment at contaminated waste sites by accelerating scientifically-defensible and costeffective decisions for cleanup at complex sites, mining sites, marine spills, and Brownfields in 

accordance with CERCLA. 

Healthy Communities and Ecosystems

Ensuring Safe Food 

The FY 2005 request includes $156.7 

million to meet implementation challenges of the 

Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 so 

that all Americans will continue to enjoy one of 

the safest and most affordable food supplies in 

the world. The Agency’s implementation of FQPA focuses on science-driven policies for 

pesticides review, seeks to encourage the development of reduced risk pesticides to provide an 

alternative to the older versions on the market, and works to develop and deliver information on 

alternative pesticides/techniques and best pest control practices to pesticide users. The Agency 

is also working to help farmers’ transition--without disrupting production--to safer substitutes and 

alternative farming practices. Reassessing existing tolerances ensures food safety, especially 

for infants and children, and ensures that all pesticides registered for use meet current health 

standards. This budget request also supports FQPA research. That research seeks to reduce 

uncertainties in risk assessment by developing tools to reduce reliance on default assumptions 

and support the development of new assessment methodologies. 

Chemical Programs 

EPA’s strategy to prevent and reduce potential risks posed by chemicals and 

microorganisms comprises three primary approaches: preventing the introduction into U.S. 

commerce of chemicals that pose unreasonable risks; effectively screening the stock of 

chemicals already in use for potential risk; and developing and implementing action plans to 

reduce use of and exposure to chemicals that have been demonstrated to harm humans and 

the environment. EPA will continue to work with states and Tribes, other federal agencies, the 

private sector, and international entities to implement this strategy and, in particular, to make 

protection of children and the aging a fundamental goal of public health and environmental 

protection in the United States and around the world. Both the New Chemicals and Existing 

Chemicals programs have initiated work to develop long-term, ambitious targets not only in 

response to the FY 2004 PART process but also in conjunction with the EPA Strategic Plan 

revision effort. Both have made significant improvements since the FY 2004 review, with new 

By the end of 2005, EPA will reassess a 

cumulative 88% of the 9,721 pesticide 

tolerances required to be reassessed over 

ten years. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

x 

chemicals program receiving one of the highest ratings of EPA programs reviewed by the PART 

for FY 2005. Both programs are continuing its efforts to improve performance measurement in 

response to FY 2005 PART findings by developing long-term and associated annual efficiency 

measures. 

Great Lakes 

To advance the Agency’s efforts regarding innovative and effective partnerships, EPA is 

making a significant investment in the Great Lakes Legacy Act program to address cleanup of 

contaminated sediments. EPA and its Great Lakes community partners will collaborate on 

remedial action within the Areas of Concern identified as potential Legacy Act sediment 

remediation sites in 2005. 

Chesapeake Bay 

The FY 2005 President’s Budget includes $30 million for the Chesapeake Bay. 

Of that total, $10 million in the Targeted Watershed program is directed toward 

Chesapeake Bay for a regional pilot program that will help sewage treatment plants 

reduce nutrient discharges to the Bay through nonpoint source projects. Partners in the 

effort to protect the Bay include Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania; the District of 

Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-state legislative body; EPA, which 

represents the Federal government; and participating citizen advisory groups. 

Brownfields 

Additionally, the Agency is committed to building innovative and effective 

partnerships that allow states and tribes to make environmental decisions on local 

levels. This budget provides $210 million for Brownfields. As one of the 

Administration’s top environmental priorities and a key to restoring contaminated sites to 

productive use, the Brownfields program will draw on some of these resources to 

enhance state and Tribal response programs. By protecting land and revitalizing 

contaminated sites throughout the US, EPA continues to expand efforts to foster healthy 

and economically sustainable communities and attract new investments to rejuvenate 

areas. 

Homeland Security 

 EPA’s FY 2005 Annual Plan and Budget requests $97 million and 151 FTE to 

support the Agency’s Homeland Security responsibilities in accordance with the Public 

Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, the National 

Strategy for Homeland Security, and Presidential Directives (PDD) 39, 62, 63. In 

addition, EPA will conduct research and provide guidance and technical support for 

Federal, state, local governments, and other institutions in the areas of biological 

agents, water security, and rapid risk assessment. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

xi 

Compliance and Environmental Stewardship

Many of the environmental 

improvements in this country during 

the past 30 years can be attributed to 

a strong set of environmental laws 

and EPA’s efforts to ensure 

compliance with those laws through a 

smart enforcement program. A smart 

enforcement program uses a mix of integrated strategies, partnerships, and innovative 

approaches to provide cleaner air, purer water, and better protected land. An integrated 

approach considers the appropriate tools to use when addressing environmental problems, and 

uses data analysis and other relevant information to marshal and leverage resources to target 

significant noncompliance and address the associated environmental risks. The program uses 

a combination of tools such as compliance assistance and incentives, monitoring, and civil and 

criminal enforcement, in cooperating with our regulatory partner, to provide a broad scope of 

actions designed to protect public health and the environment. State, Tribal, and local 

governments bear much of the responsibility for ensuring compliance. EPA works in 

partnership with them and other Federal agencies to promote environmental protection. 

 

 The FY 2005 request will continue to 

support the regulated community’s compliance 

with environmental requirements through 

voluntary compliance incentives and assistance 

programs. The Agency will provide information 

and technical assistance to the regulated 

community through the compliance assistance 

program to increase its understanding of all 

statutory or regulatory environmental 

requirements, thereby reducing risk to human health and the environment and gaining 

measurable improvements in compliance. The program will also continue to develop strategies 

and compliance assistance tools that will support initiatives targeted toward improving 

compliance at Federal facilities, in specific industrial and commercial sectors, or with certain 

regulatory requirements. 

 The President’s FY 2005 request continues to support pollution prevention. 

Increasingly, the nation is recognizing the value of pollution prevention as an environmental 

strategy, as a sustainable business practice, and as a funding principle of our society. It is also 

a vehicle for “reinventing” traditional EPA programs and devising innovative alternative 

strategies to protect public health and the environment. Through EPA’s leadership, pollution 

prevention has become a key element of initiatives to improve federal environmental 

management, empower state and tribal programs, encourage corporate stewardship, and better 

inform the public. 

A strong enforcement program identifies and reduces 

noncompliance problems, assists the regulated 

community in understanding environmental laws and 

regulations, responds to complaints from the public, 

strives to secure a level economic playing field for lawabiding companies, and deters future violations. 

Increase the regulated community’s 

compliance with environmental 

requirements through their expanded use of 

compliance assistance. The Agency will 

continue to support small business 

compliance assistance centers and develop 

compliance assistance tools such as sector 

notebooks and compliance guides. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

xii 

Enhancing Environmental Performance

 To further EPA’s goal of promoting environmental stewardship, the Agency will make 

investments in programs to support State innovation and pollution prevention in FY 2005. A 

new State and Tribal Performance Fund provides $23 million in competitive grants to develop 

projects with tangible, performance-based environmental and health outcomes that can be 

models for implementation across the nation. EPA will also continue its emphasis on working 

with Tribal governments to build the capacity of their environmental programs. 

Strong Science

 The FY 2005 budget supports EPA’s efforts to further strengthen the role of science in 

decision-making by using sound scientific information and analysis to help direct policy and 

establish priorities. This budget request includes $572 million for the Office of Research and 

Development to develop and apply strong science to address both current and future 

environmental challenges. These resources support a balanced research and development 

program designed to address Administration and Agency priorities, and meet the challenges of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), and other 

environmental statutes. The budget request includes important new or increased research 

efforts in the following areas: computational toxicology, data quality, and IRIS. 

In accordance with the Administration’s Investment Criteria for Research and 

Development (relevance, quality, and performance), the Agency will continue to improve the 

application of the Criteria to achieve maximum environmental and health protections. Efforts 

include applying the highest quality scientific methods, models, tools, and approaches. 

Relevance

 EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) has developed Multi-Year Plans 

(MYPs) for each of its major research programs. These MYPs describe the scientific context 

and present clear goals and priorities for each research program. Reflecting the inherently longterm nature of research, each MYP has identified annual and long-term (five to eight years out) 

goals that contribute to achievement of the Agency’s strategic outcome goals and objectives. 

Each MYP is regularly updated to reflect scientific and budgetary changes, and is independently 

peer-reviewed. 

 The Agency is also exploring options for establishing periodic evaluations of EPA 

research programs. Beginning in FY 2005, regular evaluations by independent and external 

panels will provide prospective and retrospective reviews of program relevance, quality, and 

performance to date. Specifically, evaluators will determine whether EPA research programs 

have complete plans with clear goals and priorities, articulate potential public benefits, are 

relevant to National, scientific, and customer needs, and identify appropriate output and 

outcome measures, schedules, and decision points. Evaluations will also include an 

examination of program design to determine the appropriateness of a program’s short-, 

intermediate-, and long-term goals and its strategy for attaining these. Recommendations and 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

xiii 

results from these reviews will improve the design and management of EPA research programs 

and help to measure progress under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). 

EPA Program Offices and Regions actively participate in setting goals and priorities for Agency 

research. This input is used on an annual basis to inform and identify the performance impacts 

of budgetary decisions. 

Quality

 The Agency will continue to rely upon peer review as a critical means of ensuring that 

Agency science activities are technically adequate, competently performed, properly 

documented, and satisfy established quality requirements. To ensure quality, all scientific and 

technical work products undergo either internal or external peer review, with major or significant 

products requiring external peer review. 

 EPA’s Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program is a competitive, peer-reviewed, 

extramural grants program whose goal is to enhance EPA’s research efforts by engaging the 

nation’s best scientists to provide high-quality, innovative research and solutions to protect 

human health and the environment. The STAR program uses external scientific peer reviewers 

to rate applications based on scientific merit. 

Performance

 In response to recommendations from the National Research Council, EPA’s Science 

Advisory Board, and OMB, ORD is continually working to improve the performance of its 

research programs. Because of the inherent challenge in measuring research results, EPA is 

taking a multi-faceted approach in tracking and communicating the performance of its research 

programs. 

 Specifically, EPA has developed multi-year plans for each of its research programs 

using a program design/evaluation logic model to help identify the outputs, customers, transfer 

needs, and short-, intermediate-, and long-term outcomes of each research program. ORD has 

incorporated these critical elements its long-term and annual performance goals to illustrate how 

research contributes to the achievement of Agency outcomes. The Agency has included 

specific long-term goals and annual performance goals which represent significant research 

accomplishments in the individual goal chapters of the budget request. EPA will also determine 

success in achieving each program’s research commitments not only by its timeliness in 

meeting annual performance goals, but will also hold external independent reviews on a regular 

basis to evaluate the relevance, quality, and performance of its research programs. 

 EPA believes that taking a multi-year approach to its research planning, incorporating 

the elements of logic model design in the development of outcome-oriented performance 

information, and initiating external independent reviews of its research programs are important 

improvements in support of achieving significant research results and contributing to the 

achievement of Agency environmental and health outcomes. 
Annual Plan and Budget Overview 

xiv 

The President’s Management Agenda: A Commitment to Reform & Results

The Agency is committed to achieving the Administration’s management reform priorities 

for a government that is results-oriented, citizen-centered, and market-based. This Annual Plan 

and Budget represents a strong commitment to reduce regulatory burdens and streamline 

Agency operations, so that the Agency’s focus is on positive and measurable environmental 

results while working more effectively with our partners and stakeholders. Since FY 1999, EPA 

has undertaken significant management reform by restructuring its budget to match the strategic 

goals and objectives of its strategic plan. Since then, EPA has worked consistently to improve 

its ability to manage for results. The Agency’s current management reform agenda fully 

supports the goals of the President’s Management Agenda, and EPA has made demonstrable 

progress in carrying out the five government-wide initiatives as reflected in Executive Branch 

Scorecard updates and in delivering environmental results to our ultimate customer--the 

American public. 

Implementation of the President’s Management Agenda is a major focus of the Agency’s 

FY 2005 budget request. EPA has identified major efforts to accelerate its progress in “getting 

to green” in all five initiatives: Budget and Performance Integration, Improved Financial 

Performance, Expanding E-Government, Competitive Sourcing, and Strategic Management of 

Human Capital. The Agency’s plans are described throughout this justification. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) rated EPA’s progress as “green” in all five of the five areas and 

its status as “green” in Improved Financial Performance. 

EPA continues to place a great emphasis on improving performance measures. The 

results of the Administration’s Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART) were used to 

inform the Agency’s FY 2005 budget request. For example, EPA is investing in water quality 

monitoring to ensure adequate information is available to link programmatic outputs to 

environmental outcomes, and the Agency is better targeting pollution prevention (P2) efforts by 

enhancing P2 programs that have shown outcome results. In addition to and complementing 

the Agency’s outcome-based environmental performance measures, some programs have 

developed or are in the process of developing efficiency measures. These measures are 

structured as a ratio of key program inputs (e.g. time, dollars, FTE) to program outputs or 

outcomes. They are intended to provide EPA program managers with additional information to 

be used as a tool for sound decision-making in program management. 

The Agency has also incorporated Measurement Development Plans (MDPs) into this 

year’s Annual Plan and Budget. MDPs, which recognize that environmental performance does 

not necessarily improve in one year, describe efforts to fill identified measurement gaps so that 

progress toward developing fully functioning measures, whether long-term or short-term, can be 

tracked. MDPs provide a road map for developing improved long-term and short-term 

performance measures for inclusion in the next strategic plan, tracking current strategic targets 

that cannot be measured annually, and assessing progress in addressing performance 

measurement gaps. 
Environmental Protection Agency’s

Resources by Major Category

(Dollars in Billions)

$4.08 $4.05 $4.25 $4.33

$1.35 $1.34

$1.46 $1.45

$2.66 $2.69 $1.92 $1.98

$3.9 $3.6 $3.6 $3.4 $3.0 $2.7 $3.1

$1.4

$1.3 $1.4

$1.5 $1.5 $1.4

$1.4

$2.6

$2.5 $2.6 $2.5

$2.2

$2.5 $2.0

$0.0

$1.0

$2.0

$3.0

$4.0

$5.0

$6.0

$7.0

$8.0

$9.0

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Infrastructure 

Trust Funds

Operating Programs

$7.76

$6.6 $6.5

$7.4 $7.6 $7.6

$7.9 $8.09 $8.08

$7.63

FYs 1995-2003 reflect EPA’s final enacted operating plan

FYs 2004-2005 reflect the President’s Budget (Totals include -$4M and -30 M in offsetting receipts)

FY 2002 does not include $175.6 million provided for Homeland security in the Emergency Supplemental

Appropriations Act

$6.7

xv

Annual Plan and Budget Overview
Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Workforce

17,508

17,082 17,152

17,739

18,110

17,670

17,558 17,478

17,741

17,850 17,904

15,000

15,500

16,000

16,500

17,000

17,500

18,000

18,500

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

FY 1995 through FY 2003 reflect actual FTE usage.

FYs 2004 & 2005 work years are workforce ceilings based on the President’s budget submissions. 

The projected utilization rate for FY 2004-2005 is 17,635 workyears in each year..

Annual Plan and Budget Overview

xvi
Goal 1

12.9%

Goal 2

37.7%

Goal 3

23.1%

Goal 4

16.7%

Goal 5

9.6%

Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems

Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Strewardship

Environmental Protection Agency’s

FY 2005 Budget by Goal

Total Agency: $7,759 Million

Annual Plan and Budget Overview

xvii

Note: Totals do not add due to rounding.
This page intentionally left blank 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global 

Climate Change 
This page intentionally left blank 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-1 

Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

Strategic Goal: Protect and improve the air so it is healthy to breathe and risks to human 

health and the environment are reduced. Reduce greenhouse gas intensity by enhancing 

partnerships with businesses and other sectors. 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000)

 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY2005 

President’s 

Budget Difference

1 - Healthier Outdoor Air $579,059 $659,876 $80,817 

2 - Healthier Indoor Air $48,043 $48,955 $912 

3 - Protect the Ozone Layer $19,069 $21,814 $2,744 

4 - Radiation $34,859 $34,718 ($141)

5 - Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity $106,936 $108,389 $1,453 

6 - Enhance Science and Research $128,017 $130,864 $2,847 

 Goal 1 Total $915,983 $1,004,616 $88,632 

 

Workyears 2,738 2,757 19 

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

 Based on air quality trends measured at more than 5000 monitoring sites across the 

U.S., air quality has improved steadily since the 1970s. This improvement has occurred even 

as Gross Domestic Product has increased by 164 percent, miles traveled by cars and trucks 

have increased 155 percent, energy consumption has increased by 42 percent; and population 

has increased by 38 percent.1

 

 Concerted efforts and steady progress have achieved cleaner, healthier air, but air 

pollution continues to be a human health and environmental problem in the U.S. and around the 

world. The average adult breathes over 3,400 gallons of air every day. Children are more 

susceptible to air pollution because they breathe even more air per pound of body weight than 

adults. Children also are at greater risk because they are more active outdoors and their lungs 

 

1

 U.S. EPA, Latest Findings on National Air Quality: 2002 Status and Trends Report, 454/K-03-001 

(August 2003), http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/. 

12.9% of Budget
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-2 

are still developing. The elderly are more sensitive to air pollution because they often have 

heart or lung disease.2

 Pollutants in the air cause cancer or other serious health effects, including respiratory, 

developmental, and reproductive problems. Certain pollutants, such as some metals and 

certain organic chemicals, that are emitted from industrial and other sources can be deposited 

into water bodies and magnified through the food web, adversely affecting fish-eating humans 

and animals. Air pollution also damages crops and forests, makes soil and waterways more 

acidic, reduces visibility, and accelerates corrosion of buildings and monuments.3

 

 In addition, air pollutants diminish the protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere. 

Human activities also affect the mixture of gases in the atmosphere and contribute to the 

potential for world climate change. 

Outdoor Air Pollution: The Clean Air Act4

 addresses three general categories of outdoor air 

pollution: “criteria” pollutants, air toxics, and acid rain. Criteria pollutants include six common 

pollutants: particulate matter (PM), ozone, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon 

monoxide (CO), and lead, for which EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards to protect 

public health and the environment. Air toxics, also called hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), are 

pollutants that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health problems, such 

as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse ecological effects. The Clean Air Act lists 

188 HAPs. Examples include: dioxin, mercury, benzene, toluene, and xylene. Acid rain is 

formed when SO2 and nitrogen oxides (NOx) react in the atmosphere with water, oxygen, and 

oxidants to form acid droplets. 

 The paragraphs below summarize the health and environmental effects associated with 

the six criteria pollutants, air toxics, and acid rain.5

 Particulate Matter. PM is associated with a wide variety of health and environmental 

problems. When exposed to higher concentration of fine PM, people with existing lung 

or heart diseases – such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive 

heart disease, or coronary artery disease – are at increased risk of health problems 

requiring hospitalization or of premature death. Similarly, children and people with 

existing lung disease may not be able to breathe as deeply or vigorously as they 

normally would and they may experience symptoms such as coughing and shortness of 

breath. Fine PM can increase susceptibility to respiratory infections and can aggravate 

existing respiratory diseases, such as asthma and chronic bronchitis, causing more use 

of medication and more doctor visits. 

PM also is a major cause of haze and reduced visibility in parts of the U.S., including 

many of our national parks. Particles can be carried over long distances by wind and 

then settle on ground or water. The effects of certain PM settling may include acidifying 

 

2

 Ibid 

3

 Ibid 

4

 Clean Air Act Title 1, Part A and Part D, Subparts 3 and 5 (42 U.S.C. 7401-7431, 7512-7512a, 7514-

7541a)(15 U.S.C. 2605); Clean Air Act Amendments Title II (42 U.S.C. 7521-7590); Clean Air Act 

Amendments, Title IV (42 U.S.C. 7651-7661); Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q) 5 Latest Findings on National Air Quality: 2002 Status and Trends Report
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-3 

lakes and streams, changing the nutrient balance in coastal waters and watersheds, 

depleting the nutrients in soil, damaging sensitive forests and farm crops, and 

decreasing the diversity of ecosystems. 

 Ground-level Ozone (smog). When breathed at any concentration, ozone can irritate 

and inflame a person’s airways. Health effects attributed to exposures to ozone, 

generally while individuals are engaged in moderate or heavy exertion, include 

significant decreases in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms such as chest 

pain and cough as concentrations rise. Exposures to ozone result in lung inflammation, 

aggravate respiratory diseases such as asthma, and may make people more susceptible 

to respiratory effects. Other at-risk groups include adults who are active outdoors and 

individuals with respiratory disorders such as asthma. 

Ground-level ozone interferes with the ability of many plants to produce and store food. 

This reduces crop and forest yields by making plants more susceptible to disease, 

insects, other pollutants, and harsh weather. Ozone also damages the leaves of trees 

and other plants, affecting the appearance of cities, national parks, and recreation 

areas. 

 Sulfur Dioxide. Peak levels of SO2 can cause temporary breathing difficulty for people 

with asthma who are active outdoors. Longer-term exposure to a combination of SO2

and fine particles can cause respiratory illness, alter the defense mechanisms of lungs, 

and aggravate cardiopulmonary disease. People who may be most susceptible to these 

effects include individuals with cardiovascular disease or chronic lung disease, as well 

as children and the elderly. SO2 also is a major contributor to acidic deposition. 

 Nitrogen Dioxide. Exposure to NO2 causes respiratory symptoms such as coughing, 

wheezing, and shortness of breath in children and adults with respiratory diseases such 

as asthma. Even short exposures to NO2 affect lung function. NO2 also contributes to 

acidic deposition, eutrophication in coastal waters, and visibility problems. 

 Carbon Monoxide. The health threat from even low levels of CO is most serious for 

those who suffer from heart disease, like angina, clogged arteries, or congestive heart 

disease. For a person with heart disease, a single exposure to CO at low levels may 

cause chest pain and reduce that person’s ability to exercise. Even healthy people can 

be affected by high levels of CO. People who breathe higher levels of CO can develop 

vision problems, experience reduced ability to work or learn, have reduced manual 

dexterity, and have difficulty performing complex tasks. CO is most dangerous in 

enclosed or confined spaces and will cause death. 

 Lead. Lead causes damage to the kidneys, liver, brain and nerves, and to other organs. 

Excessive exposure to lead causes seizures, mental retardation, behavioral disorders, 

memory problems, and mood changes. Low levels of lead damage the brain and nerves 

in fetuses and young children, resulting in learning deficits and lowered IQ. 

 Air toxics. Air toxics or HAPs, are pollutants that are known or suspected to cause 

cancer or other serious health problems, such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or 

adverse environmental effects. HAPs are emitted from thousands of sources, including 

automobiles, utilities, and industries. HAPs also can contribute to the levels of PM and 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-4 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs), precursors to ozone. Adverse effects to human 

health and the environment due to HAPs can result from even low level exposures to air 

toxics from individual facilities, exposures to mixtures of pollutants found in urban 

settings, or exposures to pollutants emitted from distant sources that are transported 

through the atmosphere over regional, national, or even global airsheds. 

Compared to information for the six criteria pollutants, the information about the 

ambient concentrations of HAPs and their potential health effects is relatively 

incomplete. Most of the information on the potential health effects of these pollutants is 

derived from experimental data. Of the 188 HAPs, almost 60 percent are classified by 

the Clean Air Act (section 112 (f)(2)(A)) as known, probable, or possible carcinogens. 

One of the often-documented ecological concerns associated with toxic air pollutants is 

the potential to damage aquatic ecosystems. 

 Acid Rain. Emissions of SO2 and NOx react in the atmosphere and fall to earth as acid 

rain, causing acidification of lakes and streams and contributing to the damage of trees 

at high elevations. Acid deposition also accelerates the decay of building materials and 

paints and contributes to degradation of irreplaceable cultural objects, such as statues 

and sculptures. NOx deposition contributes to eutrophication of coastal waters, such as 

the Chesapeake Bay and Tampa Bay. Before falling to earth, SO2 and NOx gases form 

fine particles (fine PM) that affect public health by contributing to premature mortality, 

chronic bronchitis, and other respiratory problems. 

Indoor Air Pollution: Indoor air levels of many pollutants may be two to five times, and 

occasionally more than 100 times, higher than outdoor levels. There is no comprehensive 

monitoring of the quality of indoor air in the U.S. and the actual levels for many pollutants are 

not well understood. Indoor air pollutants are of particular concern because most people spend 

as much as 90% of their time indoors. Common sources can include burning kerosene, wood, 

or oil; smoking tobacco products; releases from household cleaners, pesticides, building 

materials; and radon. Inadequate ventilation can increase indoor pollutant levels by not bringing 

in enough outdoor air to dilute emissions from indoor sources and by not carrying indoor air 

pollutants out of the home. High temperatures and humidity levels can also increase 

concentrations of some pollutants. 

 Poor indoor air quality can cause short-term problems, including headaches, fatigue, 

dizziness, nausea, and a scratchy throat. Other effects include cancer – particularly from longterm exposure to high secondhand smoke and radon concentrations – and aggravation of 

chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma. Exposure to naturally occurring radon gas is the 

second leading cause (after smoking tobacco) of lung cancer among Americans.6

Climate Change: The buildup of greenhouse gases—primarily carbon dioxide, methane, and 

nitrous oxide—has heat-trapping properties that may impact climate on Earth. These potential 

regional climate changes could alter forests, crop yields, and water supplies. These changes 

could also threaten human health, and harm birds, fish, and many types of ecosystems. 

 

6

 Institute of Medicine, Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures (Washington, DC: The National 

Academy Press, 200). Available at http://books.nap.edu/books/0309064961/html/R1.html. 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-5 

Stratospheric Ozone Depletion: A protective ozone layer is located in the stratosphere about 

six to 30 miles above the Earth’s surface. This layer protects humans and other species from 

the sun’s harmful ultraviolet radiation (UV). This protective shield is being damaged by 

chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, and methyl bromide, and can lead to 

harmful health effects such as skin cancer and cataracts.7

 Increased UV also can lead to 

reduced crop yield and disruptions in the marine food chain. 

 Ozone depletion and climate change are separate environmental issues but are related 

in some ways. Specifically, some substances that deplete the ozone layer also are potent and 

very long-lived greenhouse gases that absorb outgoing radiation and warm the atmosphere. 

Radiation: Radiation occurs naturally (e.g., radon), but we also use radioactive materials in 

electricity generation, in industrial processes, and in medical diagnoses and treatments. Any 

activity that produces or uses radioactive materials generates radioactive waste. Mining, nuclear 

power generation, and various processes in industry, defense, medicine, and scientific research 

produce byproducts that include radioactive waste. Radioactive waste can be in gas, liquid, or 

solid form, and the level of radioactivity can vary. The waste can remain radioactive for a few 

hours or several months or even hundreds of thousands of years. Frequent exposures to 

radiation can cause cancer and other adverse health effects. 

Science and Research: EPA relies on sound science in its clean air programs. EPA uses 

sound science to determine the relative risks that air pollution poses to human health and the 

environment. In addition, the Agency utilizes science in an attempt to identify the best means to 

detect, abate and avoid environmental problems associated with air pollutants. 

MEANS AND STRATEGY

 The air problems that now remain are some of the most difficult to solve. EPA’s strategy 

to address the overall goals of the clean air program includes a combination of national and 

local measures that reflect the different roles of Federal, state, Tribal, and local governments. 

EPA, states, and local agencies work together as partners to meet clean air goals costeffectively by employing an array of regulatory, market-based, and voluntary approaches and 

programs. Federal assistance and leadership are essential for developing and implementing 

cooperative programs to prevent and control air pollution; for ensuring that national standards 

are met; and for providing tools for states, Tribes, and local communities to use in preparing and 

implementing their clean air plans and programs. 

Healthier Outdoor Air: Problems with broad regional, national or global impact 

emissions from power plants and other large sources, pollution from motor vehicles and 

fuels, and stratospheric ozone depletion – are best handled primarily at the multi-state, 

regional, or Federal level. A national approach allows for the use of traditional, 

 

7 June 1999, "Synthesis Report of the Reports of the Scientific, Environmental Effects, Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panels of the Montreal Protocol: A Decade of Assessments for Decision Makers 

Regarding the Protection of the Ozone Layer: 1988 - 1999" ; January 2003, Report of the Montreal 

Protocol Science Assessment Panel, "Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2002"; March 2003, 

Report of the Montreal Protocol Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, "Environmental Effects of 

Ozone Depletion: 2002".
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-6 

regulatory tools where appropriate, and enables EPA to implement innovative, marketbased techniques such as emissions trading, banking, and averaging, and other national 

programs cost-effectively. 

 States, Tribes, and local agencies can best address the regional and local 

problems that remain after Federal measures have been fully applied. Many of these 

approaches employ innovative techniques, such as diesel retrofits and community-based 

approaches to toxics that are well-suited to the local nature of many air-related 

problems. EPA works closely with public- and private-sector partners and stakeholders 

to develop the tools – such as monitoring, modeling, and emission inventories – that 

allow states, Tribes, and localities to address these more localized problems. 

 EPA will also work to build the institutional capacity within developing countries 

and regionally manage air pollution, focusing on those countries that have demonstrated 

potential and commitment to affect human health and the environment globally. 

Programs include those that address clean fuels, reduction of mercury and lead 

emissions, training on various air quality issues, and partnering with existing clean air 

initiatives. 

 To improve air quality and address the highest health and environmental risks, 

EPA will proceed with Federal stationary and mobile source programs aimed at 

achieving large, nationwide, cost-effective reductions in emissions of PM and its 

contributors such as SO2, NOx, and elemental and organic carbon; ozone-forming NOx; 

and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). 

 The President’s Clear Skies Initiative is a cornerstone of the EPA strategy. The 

proposed legislation, re-introduced in the Congress in February 2003, would create a 

mandatory program that is designed to reduce dramatically power plant emissions of 

SO2, NOx, and mercury, three of the most harmful air pollutants from power generators, 

from FY 2000 levels.8

 (Alternatively, the Interstate Air Quality and Utility Mercury 

Reduction Rules are integrated air rules proposed by EPA in December 2003 to achieve 

many of Clear Skies’ objectives absent new legislation.).9

 Both Clear Skies and the 

proposed integrated air rules would create a market-based program, with results 

guaranteed by emissions caps instituted over a period of time, an approach that proved 

successful in reducing acid rain. As the Clear Skies Initiative moves forward, through 

enactment of new legislation or promulgation of the proposed Interstate Air Quality and 

Utility Mercury Reduction Rules, EPA will continue to implement the Acid Rain Program 

to reduce SO2 and NOx emissions from electric power generators and address the 

interstate transport of ozone and NOx through the NOx Budget Program, a multi-state 

emissions allowance trading program under the NOx SIP Call. In addition, EPA is 

implementing national programs that will dramatically reduce future emissions from a 

wide range of mobile sources, including cars, minivans, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), 

trucks, buses, motorcycles, and nonroad engines. 

 

8

 Senate and House of Representatives, Clear Skies Legislation Act of 2002, S. 2815 (July 29, 2002) and 

H.R. 5266 (July 26, 2002), http://www.epa.gov/clearskies/bill.pdf 9

 40CFR Parts 51, 72, 75, 96 Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone 

(Interstate Air Quality Rule) web site www.epa.gov/interstateairquality/ 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-7 

 EPA will propose whether to update the particulate matter standards in FY 2005 

and will continue the work necessary to propose whether to update the ozone standard 

in FY 2006. EPA also will provide guidance and technical support to states, Tribes and 

local communities to help meet multiple air quality standards and regional haze progress 

goals, especially for those pollutants that share common precursors or emission 

sources. 

Healthier Indoor Air: EPA implements two primary strategies to meet its human health 

objective for indoor air quality, increasing public awareness and increasing partnerships 

with non-governmental and professional entities. EPA raises public awareness of actual 

and potential indoor air risks so that individuals can take steps to reduce exposure. 

Outreach activities, in the form of educational literature, media campaigns, hotlines, and 

clearinghouse operations, provide essential information about indoor air health risks not 

only to the public, but to the professional and research communities as well. 

 Underpinning EPA’s outreach efforts is a strong commitment to environmental 

justice, community-based risk reductions, and customer service. Through partnerships, 

EPA disseminates multi-media materials encouraging individuals, schools, and industry 

to take action to reduce health risks in their indoor environments. In addition, EPA uses 

technology transfer to improve the ways in which all types of buildings, including 

schools, homes, and workplaces, are designed, operated, and maintained. To support 

these voluntary approaches, EPA incorporates the most current science available as the 

basis for recommending ways that people can reduce exposure to indoor contaminants. 

Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity: In 2002, President Bush announced a new 

approach to global climate change designed to harness the power of the marketplace 

and technological innovation. The President committed America to cut greenhouse gas 

intensity by 18 percent over the next decade.10 EPA’s voluntary climate programs play a 

major role in meeting this goal by working in partnership with businesses and other 

sectors through programs that deliver multiple benefits while improving overall scientific 

understanding of climate change and its potential consequences. The core of EPA’s 

climate change efforts are voluntary government/industry partnership programs – such 

as the ENERGY STAR program - designed to capitalize on the tremendous 

opportunities available to consumers, businesses, state and local governments, and 

organizations to make sound investments in energy efficient equipment and practices. 

These voluntary programs remove barriers to existing and emerging technologies in the 

marketplace, resulting in faster deployment of energy efficient technology into the 

residential, commercial, transportation, and industrial sectors of the economy. 

 Through its Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) program, EPA develops unique 

new technologies with high potential for improving air quality and dramatically improving 

vehicle efficiency. Through partnerships with industry, significant elements of EPA’s 

technologies will be introduced commercially by vehicle manufacturers before the end of 

the decade. In addition, EPA works with other key stakeholders in promoting the 

 

10 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, President Announces Clear Skies & Global Climate 

Change Initiatives (February 14, 2002), http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020214-

5.html
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-8 

development and commercialization of fuel cell technology in support of U.S. 

environmental, energy, and national security goals. 

Protect the Ozone Layer: EPA’s strategy for restoring the ozone layer includes 

carrying out a program that includes domestic rules and international technology 

transfer. As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone 

Layer, the U.S. is obligated to regulate and enforce the terms of the treaty domestically. 

In accordance with this treaty and related Clean Air Act requirements, EPA will continue 

to implement the domestic rule-making agenda for the reduction and control of ozonedepleting substances (ODSs) and enforce rules controlling their production, import, and 

emission. This includes combining market-based regulatory approaches with sectorspecific technology guidelines and facilitating the development and commercialization of 

alternatives to methyl bromide and HCFCs. EPA will strengthen outreach efforts to 

ensure efficient and effective compliance, and continue to identify and promote safer 

alternatives to curtail ozone depletion. To help reduce international emissions, EPA will 

assist with the transfer of technology to developing countries and work with them to 

accelerate the phase-out of ODSs. EPA estimates that the worldwide phase-out of ODS 

will save 6.3 million lives from fatal cases of skin cancer, avoid 299 million cases of 

nonfatal skin cancers, and avoid 27.5 million cases of cataracts in the U.S. alone 

between 1990 and 2165. 

 Because the ozone layer is not expected to recover until the middle of this 

century at the earliest, the public will continue to be exposed to higher levels of UV 

radiation than existed prior to the use and emission of ODS. Recognizing this and the 

public’s current sun-exposure practices, EPA will continue education and outreach 

efforts to encourage behavioral changes the primary means of reducing UV-related 

health risks. 

Radiation: EPA continues to meet the statutory mandates for managing radiation waste 

and controlling radioactive emissions and to fulfill its responsibilities under Presidential 

Decision Directives for radiological emergency preparedness and response. These 

responsibilities form the core of our strategy to protect the public and the environment 

from unnecessary exposure to radiation. EPA works with states, Tribes, and industry to 

develop innovative training, public information and voluntary programs to minimize these 

exposures. 

Science and Research: To support achievement of its clean air objectives and the 

overall goal of clean air for American communities and surrounding ecosystems, EPA 

will ensure that efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best available 

scientific information. In addition, EPA will continue to integrate critical scientific 

assessment with policy, regulatory and non-regulatory activities. 

 EPA’s air pollution research supports the Agency’s mandated responsibilities 

under the Clean Air Act. This research falls into two distinct groups: 1) research 

supporting the development and achievement of the national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS), and 2) research on hazardous air pollutants. NAAQS-related 

research focuses on tropospheric ozone and particulate matter (PM), while the Air 

Toxics Research program provides the scientific underpinnings of the Agency’s activities 

to reduce hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) as identified in the Clean Air Act. 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-9 

 PM research provides methods, models, and data on the health risks associated 

with exposure to PM, alone and in combination, focusing on exposures, health effects, 

mechanisms of injury, and identification of PM components that affect public health. In 

addition, both PM and tropospheric ozone research provide implementation tools to 

support efforts by industry, state, Tribal, and local regulators to develop and improve 

State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to attain the NAAQS. 

 Research on air toxics investigates the root causes of the environmental and 

human health problems in urban areas related to these pollutants. Efforts in this area 

provide the necessary health effects data, measurements, methods, models, 

information, and technical support to Federal, state, Tribal, and local regulators and 

industry to estimate human health effects and aggregate exposures to hazardous air 

pollutants. Research also supports atmospheric and emission modeling in order to 

estimate fate, ambient concentrations, and mobile source emissions of air toxics at a 

more refined scale. With this information, the Agency will be in a better position to 

determine risk and develop alternative strategies for maximizing risk reduction. 

 Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality air research program 

at EPA. The Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) of EPA’s Science 

Advisory Board (SAB), an independent chartered Federal Advisory Committee Act 

(FACA) committee, meets annually to conduct an in-depth review and analysis of EPA’s 

Science and Technology account. The RSAC provides its findings to the House Science 

Committee and sends a written report on the findings to EPA’s Administrator after every 

annual review. Moreover, EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) provides 

counsel to the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Research and Development 

(ORD) on the operation of ORD’s research program. Also, under the Science to Achieve 

Results (STAR) program all research projects are selected for funding through a 

rigorous competitive external peer review process designed to ensure that only the 

highest quality efforts receive funding support. Our scientific and technical work 

products must also undergo either internal or external peer review, with major or 

significant products requiring external peer review. The Agency’s Peer Review 

Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures and guidance for conducting peer review. 

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES & FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS

Healthier Outdoor Air 

 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient ozone concentrations 

below the NAAQS for the 1-hour ozone standard will increase by 4% (relative to 2004) 

for a cumulative total of 53% (relative to 1992). 

 The number of people living in areas with monitored ambient PM concentrations below 

the NAAQS for the PM-10 standard will increase by 1% (relative to 2004) for cumulative 

total of 7% (relative to 1992). 

 Air toxics emission nationwide from stationary and mobiles sources combined will be 

reduced by an additional 1% of the updated 1993 baseline of 6.0 million tons for a 

cumulative reduction of 38%. 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-10 

Healthier Indoor Air 

 843,300 additional people will be living in homes with healthier indoor air. 

 1,312,500 students, faculty and staff will experience improved indoor air quality in their 

schools. 

Protect the Ozone Layer 

 Restrict domestic consumption of class II HCFCs below 9,906 ODP-weighted metric 

tons (ODP MTs) and restrict domestic exempted production and import of newly 

produced class I CFCs and halons below 10,000 ODP MTs. 

Reduce Greenhouse Gas Intensity 

 Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced from projected levels by approximately 90 

MMTCE per year through EPA partnerships with businesses, schools, state and local 

governments, and other organizations. 

Radiation 

 Certify that 40,000 55-gallon drums of radioactive waste (containing approximately 

120,000 curies) shipped by DOE to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant are permanently 

disposed of safely and according to EPA standards. 

Enhance Science and Research 

 Transfer hybrid powertrain components, originally developed for passenger car 

applications, to meet size, performance, durability, and towing requirements of Sport 

Utility Vehicle and urban delivery vehicle applications with an average efficiency 

improvement of 30% over the baseline. 

HIGHLIGHTS

Ensure Healthier Outdoor Air 

In FY 2005, EPA will significantly expand its efforts to reduce children’s exposure to 

diesel exhaust and the amount of air pollution created by diesel school buses through its Clean 

School Bus USA program. More than 24 million children in the U.S. ride a bus to and from 

school every day and research has found that these children can be exposed to high levels of 

diesel exhaust. The Agency’s Clean School Bus USA program is designed to help reduce this 

exposure by providing grant funds to State, tribal, or local government entities to upgrade (or 

“retrofit”) newer school buses with better emission control technologies and/or fuel them with 

cleaner fuels or to replace the oldest school buses in the fleet with new, less polluting buses. In 

FY 2005, EPA will develop a grant solicitation process that will award these funds on a 

competitive basis. 

 In FY 2005, EPA will complete an assessment of how sources create Fine PM in the air 

and, along with mercury emissions, the effect on downwind areas. This assessment will support 

the Fine PM NAAQS implementation, the Interstate Air Quality Rule and the Utility Mercury 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-11 

Reductions Rule. This work will also support the President’s legislative proposal on Clear 

Skies. EPA will begin implementation efforts for both the Interstate Air Quality Rule and the 

Utility Mercury Reductions Rule. 

The Agency will also continue to work with states, Tribes and local communities to 

reduce exposure to air pollution through implementation of the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. We will provide technical support to states in developing State Implementation 

Plans to aid them in considering the transport of pollution on a regional level in their plans. For 

particulate matter, EPA will be finalizing attainment designations while working with states and 

local areas to develop control strategies to reduce emissions. For ozone, since designation will 

be finalized in 2004, the Agency will be supporting SIP development efforts while working with 

localities on innovative measures to provide early emission reductions. 

 For the HAPs, FY 2005 will be a critical year for implementing the national air toxics 

strategy. The Agency will continue its transition from a technology-based to a risk-based control 

program. The Agency is still required to set technology-based standards for area sources. 

 In FY 2005, EPA will, as required by the Clean Air Act, continue the extensive residual 

risk analyses for already promulgated maximum achievable control technology (MACT) 

standards to determine if additional standards are necessary to reduce the remaining risks from 

these sources. The Agency will continue to develop the state, local, and Tribal component of 

the Air Toxics Program so that state, local, and Tribal agencies can address emission issues 

that are of concern on a state-wide, area-wide, or community-wide basis. As part of this effort, 

EPA will continue to support community assessment and risk reduction projects. The EPA will 

release an integrated final version of the national emission inventory (NEI) using data collected 

from 2002. This integrated inventory will include air toxics emissions data for analyzing public 

health risks from air toxics and strategies to reduce them, and to manage the risks posed by air 

toxics emission. The Agency will continue to develop the national ambient air toxic network to 

improve characterization of both national and community air toxic levels. Also in FY 2005, we 

will be promulgating the Utility Mercury Reductions Rule. This program may utilize a cap and 

trade approach that would allow emissions trading in lieu of a MACT standard which is less 

flexible and more costly. (The proposed rule seeks comment on both the cap and trade and 

MACT approaches.) 

 In FY 2005, EPA will establish and implement Federal standards to require cleaner 

motor vehicles, nonroad equipment, locomotives, marine engines, and fuels that are costeffective and technically feasible. The Agency will continue implementation of the Tier II and 

gasoline sulfur standards. The Agency will also continue work on the 2007 heavy-duty highway 

engine and diesel sulfur requirements. In addition, EPA is promulgating new standards and fuel 

requirements for nonroad diesel fuel that will take effect for new engines starting as early as 

2008. 

 In addition, EPA will continue to monitor industry compliance with vehicle, engine, and 

fuel standards, and to proceed with advancements in vehicle emission control technologies. 

The type and amount of testing required at EPA’s National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions 

Laboratory continues to expand greatly to meet the much more stringent and complex 

regulations for cars, heavy-duty diesel engines, and gasoline and diesel fuels. 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-12 

Ensure Healthier Indoor Air 

In FY 2005, EPA will build on the success of its national “Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Tools 

for Schools” (TfS) program and expand implementation of this program to more schools. 

Adoption of EPA’s low-cost/no-cost guidelines for proper operation and maintenance of school 

facilities results in healthier indoor environments for all students and staff, but is of particular 

help to children with asthma, lessening the degree to which they are exposed to indoor asthma 

triggers. By increasing the number of schools where TfS indoor air quality guidelines are 

adopted and implemented, healthier indoor air will be provided for over a million students, staff, 

and faculty. 

 EPA expects, as a result of Agency programs, that over three quarters of a million 

people will be living in healthier residential indoor environments in FY 2005. Part of meeting this 

goal includes expanding the Agency’s successful education and outreach efforts to the public 

about sound indoor environmental management techniques with respect to asthma. In addition, 

the Agency will continue to focus on ways to assist the health-care community to raise its 

awareness of, and attention it pays to, indoor asthma triggers and their role in provoking asthma 

attacks in those with the disease. EPA, in conjunction with the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), will continue to seek opportunities to interact with managed care 

organizations and health insurers to promote effective asthma care practices and to encourage 

greater emphasis on avoidance of asthma triggers, as part of a comprehensive asthma 

treatment regimen. 

Greenhouse Gases 

The President’s greenhouse gas program builds on the accomplishment of EPA’s 

voluntary climate programs. EPA’s voluntary climate change programs have made significant 

progress to date. However, opportunities remain to achieve further pollution reductions and 

energy bill savings from energy efficiency programs and greater use of cost-effective renewable 

energy. In the U.S., energy consumption causes more than 85 percent of the major air 

emissions such as NOx, SO2, and CO2. At the same time, American families and businesses 

spend over $600 billion each year on energy bills. 

In FY 2005, EPA will continue to build upon its successful partnership programs such as 

ENERGY STAR, the clean energy programs, Climate Leaders, SmartWay Transport 

Partnership, and Best Workplaces for Commuters programs. Under these innovative programs 

we will expand our work with companies to encourage them to take on new voluntary 

commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

Stratospheric Ozone 

To protect the earth’s stratospheric ozone layer in accordance with the United States’ 

commitment to the Montreal Protocol, EPA will continue to regulate ozone-depleting 

compounds, foster the development and use of alternative chemicals in the U.S. and abroad, 

inform the public about the dangers of overexposure to UV radiation, and use pollution 

prevention strategies to require the recycling of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and 

hydrofluorocarbons. 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change 

1-13 

Radiation 

 In FY 2005, EPA will continue to protect people and the environment from harmful and 

avoidable exposure to radiation by oversight of radioactive waste disposal in the Waste Isolation 

Pilot Plant, setting protective limits on radioactive emissions, providing guidance and training to 

other Federal and state agencies in preparing for domestic emergencies and other incidents 

that may involve radiation, and develop guidance for cleaning up radioactively-contaminated 

Superfund sites. We will ensure that the Agency employs appropriate methods to manage 

radioactive releases and exposures. These include health-risk site assessments; risk modeling, 

cleanup, and waste management activities; voluntary programs to minimize exposure to 

radiation in commercial products and industrial applications; national environmental radiation 

monitoring; radiological emergency response; and provision of Federal guidance to our 

international, Federal, state, and local partners. 

Enhance Science and Research 

The Tropospheric Ozone and Particulate Matter (PM) Research Programs will upgrade 

methods and models to guide states in the development of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) 

used to achieve the NAAQS. In FY 2005, the Agency will release an upgraded version of the 

Models-3 Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system with upgraded 

mechanisms for speeding up the model run time. This will be an important tool for developing 

state and tribal SIPs. PM research will continue to strengthen the scientific basis for the 

periodic review of the PM NAAQS, through work that includes epidemiological and exposure 

studies. The PM program will also develop tools and methods to characterize PM sources and 

health effects that will move the Agency toward its objective of reducing Americans’ exposure to 

PM. Important products of the FY 2005 PM research program will include improved receptor 

models and data on chemical compounds to help identify sources that contribute to ambient PM 

so that states and tribes can develop more effective control strategies 

 Air toxics research provides information on effects, exposure, and source 

characterization, as well as other data to quantify existing emissions and to identify key 

pollutants and strategies for cost-effective risk management. In FY 2005, research will focus on 

providing health hazard and exposure methods, data, and models to enable the Agency to 

reduce uncertainty in risk assessments, and the production of tools that enable national, 

regional, state, or local officials to identify and implement cost-effective approaches to reduce 

risks from sources of air toxics. 

EXTERNAL FACTORS

Stakeholder Participation: To achieve clean air, EPA relies on the cooperation of Federal, 

state, Tribal, and local government agencies; industry; non-profit organizations; and individuals. 

Success is far from guaranteed, even with the full participation of all stakeholders. EPA has 

significant work to accomplish just to reach the annual targets that lead to the longer-term health 

and environmental outcomes and improvements that are articulated in the Clean Air goal. 

Meeting the Clean Air goal necessitates a strong partnership among all the stakeholders, but in 

particular among the states, Tribes, and EPA; the Environmental Council of States; and 

organizations of state and local air pollution control officials. EPA will be working with various 

stakeholders to encourage new ways to meet the challenges of “cross regional” issues as well 

as to integrate programs to address airborne pollutants more efficiently. 
Goal 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

1-14 

Environmental Factors: In developing clean air strategies, states, Tribes, and local 

governments assume normal meteorological patterns. As EPA develops standards and 

programs to achieve the Clean Air goal, it has to consider weather as a variable in the equation 

for implementing standards and meeting program goals. For example, even if an area is 

implementing a number of air pollution control programs under normal meteorological patterns, 

a hot humid summer may cause an area to exceed standards for days at a time, thereby 

exposing the public to unhealthy air. 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe 

Water 
This page intentionally left blank 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-1 

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

Strategic Goal: Ensure drinking water is safe. Restore and maintain oceans, watersheds, 

and their aquatic ecosystems to protect human health, support economic and recreational 

activities, and provide healthy habitat for fish, plants, and wildlife.

Resource Summary 

($ in 000)

 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY2005 

President’s 

Budget Difference

1 - Protect Human Health $1,192,187 $1,170,340 ($21,848)

2 - Protect Water Quality $1,647,043 $1,645,670 ($1,373)

3 - Enhance Science and Research $120,502 $120,959 $458 

 Goal 2 Total $2,959,732 $2,936,969 ($22,763)

 

Workyears 3,054 3,041 (12)

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

Over the 30 years since enactment of the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Acts 

(CWA and SDWA), government, citizens, and the private sector have worked together to make 

dramatic progress in improving the quality of surface waters and drinking water. 

 Thirty years ago, much of the nation’s tap water had either very limited treatment 

(usually disinfection) or no treatment at all. About two-thirds of the surface waters assessed by 

states were not attaining basic water quality goals and were considered polluted.11 Some of the 

Nation’s waters were open sewers posing health risks and many water bodies were so polluted 

that traditional uses, such as swimming, fishing, and recreation, were impossible. 

 Today, drinking water systems monitor and treat water to assure compliance with 

drinking water standards covering a wide range of contaminants. In addition, we now protect 

sources of drinking water through activities such as regulating injection of wastes to ground 

waters. A massive investment of federal, state, and local funds resulted in a new generation of 

wastewater treatment facilities able to provide “secondary” treatment or better. Over 50 

categories of industry now comply with nationally consistent discharge regulations. In addition, 

 

11 United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. 1998. Clean Water Action Plan: 

Restoring and Protecting America’s Water. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 

37.9% of Budget
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-2 

sustained efforts to implement “best management practices” have helped reduce runoff of 

pollutants from diffuse or “nonpoint” sources. 

 Cleaner, safer water has renewed recreational, ecological, and economic interests in 

communities across the nation. The recreation, tourism, and travel industry is one of the largest 

employers in the nation, and a significant portion of recreational spending comes from 

swimming, boating, sport fishing, and hunting.12 Each year, more than 180 million people visit 

the shore for recreation.13 In 2001, sportspersons spent a total of $70 billion– $35.6 billion on 

fishing, $20.6 billion on hunting, and $13.8 million on items used for both hunting and fishing. 

Wildlife watchers spent an additional $38.4 billion on their activities around the home and on 

trips away from home.14 The commercial fishing industry, which also requires clean water and 

healthy wetlands, contributed $28.6 billion to the economy in 2001.15 The Cuyahoga River, 

which once caught fire, is now busy with boats and harbor businesses that generate substantial 

revenue for the City of Cleveland. The Willamette River in Oregon has been restored to provide 

swimming, fishing, and water sports. Even Lake Erie, once infamous for its dead fish, now 

supports a $600 million per year fishing industry.16

 Much of the dramatic progress in improving the nation’s water quality over the past 30 

years is directly attributable to our improvements in water infrastructure. Entering the 21st

century, however, the job is far from over. Despite the gains made since the passage of the 

CWA and the SDWA, approximately 40% of the nation’s waters assessed by states still do not 

meet basic water quality standards.17 Remaining water quality problems are not easily 

remedied: they come not just from discharge from pipes, but from diffuse sources – farming 

and forestry, construction sites, urban streets, automobiles, atmospheric deposition, even 

suburban homes and yards. They are no longer just chemical in nature. There are biological 

threats to our nation’s waters that we must address as well if we are to truly achieve the stated 

goal of the CWA to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the 

nation’s waters.” 

States have identified more than 25,000 waterways as being impaired and have listed a 

group of principal causes of impairment to the waterways.18 One of these impairments is 

pesticides. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has synthesized contaminant and nutrient data 

from its 1992-1998 National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. This assessment 

 

12 Travel Industry Association of America. Tourism for America, 11th Edition. Washington, DC: Travel 

Industry of America. 

13 Pew Oceans Commission. 2002. America’s Living Oceans Charting a Course for Sea Change. 

Arlington, VA: Pew Oceans Commission. 

14 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated 

Recreation. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 15 National Marine Fisheries Service. 2002. Fisheries of the U.S. 2001. Washington, DC: Government 

Printing Office. 

16 United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. 1998. Clean Water Action Plan: 

Restoring and Protecting America’s Water. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 17 303(d) information comes from: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. States’ Listing of Impaired 

Waters as Required by Clean Water Act Section 303(d). Washington, DC. Available online at 

http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/national_rept.control. 

18 303(d) information comes from: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. States’ Listing of Impaired 

Waters as Required by Clean Water Act Section 303(d). Washington, DC. Available online at 

http://oaspub.epa.gov/waters/national_rept.control. 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-3 

found that detectable concentrations of pesticides are widespread in urban, agricultural and 

mixed-use area streams. Interestingly, streams in urban areas generally have higher 

concentrations of insecticides than streams in agricultural areas, however incidences are 

generally lower. Recent trends toward low-density development (sprawl) will increase 

waterways’ overall exposure to pesticides because it leaves fewer pristine natural areas and 

fewer trees and exposes more land to pesticides.

Reductions of pesticide concentrations in streams and groundwater require 

management strategies that focus on reducing chemical use. This means local and regional 

management strategies are needed to account for geographic patterns in chemical use and 

natural factors. One of the primary concerns for water quality in the U.S. is the role of small, 

dispersed sources of non-point source pollution. The major factors that contribute to the 

increasing levels of pesticides found in streams and groundwater include the application pattern 

of pesticides, the soil condition and the amount of rainfall or irrigation, which can increase 

pesticide run-off into streams and rivers. 

Communities are challenged to find the fiscal resources to sustain the gains of the past 

30 years, while providing clean and safe water for the future. They must find ways to replace 

aging infrastructure, to meet growing infrastructure demands fueled by population growth, and 

to secure their water and wastewater infrastructure against threats. To further our progress 

toward clean waters and safer drinking water, we must both maintain our commitment to the 

core measures we have already established and look for new ways to improve water quality and 

protect human health. 

MEANS AND STRATEGY

 EPA will focus on four key strategies to accelerate progress toward achieving the 

Nation’s clean and safe water goals. To better address the complexity of the remaining water 

quality challenges, EPA will promote local watershed approaches to achieving the best and 

most cost effective solutions to local and regional water problems. To protect and build on the 

gains of the past, EPA will focus on its core water programs. To maximize the impact of each 

dollar, EPA will continue to strengthen our vital partnerships with States, Tribes, local 

governments, and other parties that are also working toward the common goal of improving the 

Nation’s waters. To leverage progress through innovation, EPA will promote water quality 

trading, water efficiency, and other market based approaches. 

To achieve the Nation’s clean and safe water goals, EPA will operate under an 

overarching watershed approach in carrying out its statutory authorities under both the SDWA 

Amendments of 1996 and the CWA. EPA is committed to helping local governments meet the 

challenges of water management in the 21st century in fiscally responsible and sustainable 

ways. We want to maintain the improvements in water quality, while enabling communities to 

grow and prosper. 

EPA’s core water programs are the fundamental underpinning for protecting and building 

on the gains of the past. This approach calls for setting watershed goals, assessing conditions, 

determining sources of concern, addressing them using regulatory and voluntary tools, and then 

re-evaluating and adapting plans as new information becomes available. By focusing and 

integrating the work of EPA with sister agencies, States, Tribes, local governments, industry, 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-4 

and nonprofit organizations in watersheds, we are able to pool information, resources, and 

authorities and focus our collective energies on our common environmental objectives. In 

watersheds, we can better understand the cumulative impact of activities, determine the most 

critical problems, better allocate limited financial and human resources, engage stakeholders, 

win public support, and make real improvements in the environment. 

 Maintaining high environmental standards and sustaining a healthy economy requires 

that we work with States, Tribes, local governments, and other partners to optimize costs and 

conserve our natural resources. Innovative programs like water quality trading are based on a 

broad environmental perspective, looking at entire watersheds. Trading can capitalize on 

economies of scale and control cost differentials among and between sources. Trading is a 

valuable tool to more cost-effectively implement TMDLs, and to enable communities to grow 

and prosper while maintaining their commitment to water quality. Trading can also be an 

appropriate mechanism in a pre-TMDL context. 

As a result of mounting evidence that pesticide use can lead to contamination of 

groundwater, the Agency has developed a groundwater strategy. This strategy is designed to 

protect our groundwater resources from pesticide contamination. The Agency is working with 

the States and Tribes to implement local aspects of the strategy which includes providing 

assistance in the development of Pesticide Management Plans for both generic aspects of 

pesticide use, as well as more specific plans for a particular pesticide. The plans provide a 

roadmap to managing pesticides through preventive and corrective measures. In addition, EPA 

has an extensive scientific review process for data on new pesticides prior to granting 

registration, and on older pesticides under the reregistration program. One of the assessment 

areas for pesticides is the impact on ecosystems, including the likelihood of the chemical or 

product to leach into groundwater, or to persist in surface water after it leaves the field as runoff. 

Restrictions on use of the pesticide can be added to the registration (or reregistration), if 

warranted. 

Research

EPA’s water research program supports the Agency’s Clean and Safe Water Goal by 

providing the scientific basis essential for protecting human health and the environment. 

Implementation of the research provisions in the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) 

amendments and the Clean Water Act will provide improved tools (e.g., methods, models, risk 

assessments, management strategies, and new data) to better evaluate the risks posed by 

chemical and microbial contaminants that persist in the environment and threaten wildlife and, 

potentially, human health. 

The drinking water research program will focus on filling key data gaps and developing 

analytical detection methods for measuring the occurrence of chemical and microbial 

contaminants on the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) and developing and evaluating costeffective treatment technologies for removing pathogens from water supplies while minimizing 

disinfection by-product (DBP) formation. The water quality research program will provide 

approaches and methods the Agency and its partners need to develop and apply criteria to 

support designated uses, tools to diagnose and assess impairment in aquatic systems, and 

tools to restore and protect aquatic systems. Water quality research will address a wide 

spectrum of aquatic ecosystem stressors, with particular attention accorded to stressors that the 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-5 

Agency most often cites as causing water body impairment, including pathogens/indicators of 

fecal contamination, nutrients, and suspended and bedded sediments. 

Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality water research program at 

EPA. EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), an independently chartered Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (FACA) committee, meets annually to conduct an in-depth review and analysis 

of EPA’s Science and Technology account. The SAB provides its findings to the House Science 

Committee and sends a written report on the findings to EPA’s Administrator after every annual 

review. EPA’s Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) provides counsel to the Assistant 

Administrator for the Office of Research and Development (ORD) on the operation of ORD’s 

research program. Also, under the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program all research 

projects are selected for funding through a rigorous competitive external peer review process 

designed to ensure that only the highest quality efforts receive funding support. EPA’s scientific 

and technical work products must also undergo either internal or external peer review, with 

major or significant products requiring external peer review. The Agency’s Peer Review 

Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures and guidance for conducting peer review. 

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS

Protect Human Health 

 In 2005, 93% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking 

water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards through effective 

treatment and source water protection. 

 In 2005, 94% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking 

water that meets health-based standards with which systems need to comply as of 

December 2001. 

 In 2005, 75% of the population served by community water systems will receive drinking 

water that meets health-based standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or 

later. 

 In 2005 94% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets healthbased standards with which systems need to comply as of December 2001. 

 In 2005, 75% of community water systems will provide drinking water that meets healthbased standards with a compliance date of January 2002 or later. 

 In 2005, 90% of the population served by community water systems in Indian country will 

receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards. 

 In 2005, 20% of source water areas for community water systems will achieve minimized 

risk to public health. 

 In 2005, 80% of the shellfish growing acres monitored by states are approved or 

conditionally approved for use. 

 In 2005, at least 1% of the water miles/acres identified by states or tribes as having a 

fish consumption advisory in 2002 will have improved water and sediment quality so that 

increased consumption of fish and shellfish is allowed. 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-6 

 In 2005, coastal and Great Lakes beaches monitored by State beach safety programs 

will be open and safe for swimming in over 94% of the days of the beach season. 

 In 2005, restore water quality to allow swimming in not less than 2% of the stream miles 

and lake acres identified by states in 2000 as having water quality unsafe for swimming. 

Protect Water Quality 

 In 2005, 500 of the Nation’s watersheds have water quality standards met in at least 

80% of the assessed water segments. 

 In 2005, water quality standards are fully attained in over 25% of miles/acres of waters 

by 2012, with an interim milestone of restoring 2% of these waters - identified in 2000 as 

not attaining standards - by 2005. 

 In 2005, improve ratings reported on the national "good/fair/poor" scale of the National 

Coastal Condition Report for: coastal wetlands loss by at least 0.1 point; contamination 

of sediments in coastal waters by at least 0.1 point; benthic quality by at least 0.1 point; 

& eutrophic condition by at least 0.1 point 

 In 2005, scores for overall aquatic system health of coastal waters nationally, and in 

each coastal region, is improved on the “good/fair/poor” scale of the National Coastal 

Condition Report by at least 0.1 point 

 In 2005, iIn coordination with other federal partners reduce, by 11%, households on 

tribal lands lacking access to basic sanitation. 

 In 2005, water quality in Indian country will be improved at not less than 35 monitoring 

stations in tribal waters for which baseline data are available (i.e., show at least a 10% 

improvement for each of four key parameters: total nitrogen, total phosphorus, dissolved 

oxygen, and fecal coliforms.) 

Enhance Science and Research 

By 2005, provide methods for developing water quality criteria so that, by 2008, 

approaches and methods are available to States and Tribes for their use in developing and 

applying criteria for habitat alteration, nutrients, suspended and bedded sediments, pathogens 

and toxic chemicals that will support designated uses for aquatic ecosystems and increase the 

scientific basis for listing and delisting impaired water bodies under Section 303(d) of the Clean 

Water Act. 

HIGHLIGHTS

Surface Water Protection 

Water Quality Monitoring: EPA’s fiscal year 2005 request will be the first step toward 

solving the well-documented shortcomings of the Nation’s water quality monitoring. The 

most cost-efficient, practical means of making the most of scarce resources is 

information-based management that uses tools such as prevention, source water 

protection, watershed trading, and permitting on watershed basis. Monitoring is the 

foundation for information-based environmental management. It is imperative that we 

close data and information gaps as quickly as possible: they lead to market and 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-7 

regulatory failures, thwart our ability to document progress, and limit our ability to 

effectively target limited resources. Without adequate monitoring data, the managers of 

water programs cannot inform the public about the condition of the Nation’s waters; 

make wise management decisions; demonstrate the success or failure of those 

programs; and verify that resources are being used cost-effectively. Federal, State, and 

local monitoring data are essential for States to carry out their responsibilities for Clean 

Water Act requirements. Strengthening our monitoring program for both surface and 

ground water will allow for special emphasis on drinking water sources to support 

expeditious actions to protect or clean up these critical resources. 

High quality, current monitoring data is critical for states and others to: make 

watershed-based decisions, target water quality criteria development, develop 

necessary standards and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), and accurately and 

consistently portray conditions and trends. To support these efforts, the President’s 

Budget proposes $20 million to implement improved state monitoring efforts that will: 

 Describe the condition of aquatic resources at multiple scales using scientifically 

defensible methods that are statistically valid and compatible; 

 Apply predictive tools to target waters that need more intensive monitoring; 

 Implement data management systems to facilitate exchange and use of data of 

documented quality; 

 Determine site-specific water quality impacts, appropriate protection levels and 

cost-effective management actions; 

 Monitor performance to determine effectiveness of management actions and 

support adaptive management, if needed; and 

 Utilize monitoring councils/partnerships to improve collaboration among entities 

collection, analysis, and use of monitoring data and information. 

 This approach will result in social costs savings by maximizing the efficiency of 

monitoring and assessment resources and, more importantly, by ensuring that resources 

invested in environmental protection activities are directed most efficiently and are 

achieving performance objectives. 

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations and Storm Water: As evidenced by 

recent newspaper articles, withdrawal petitions, and the permit backlog, some States are 

struggling with implementation of their NPDES permitting programs. In addition, the 

universe of facilities is increasing due to new program requirements to permit 

concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and additional sources of storm water. 

Without timely issuance of high quality permits, necessary improvements in water quality 

will be delayed. To help States with this workload, we are requesting an increase of $5 

million for Section 106 Grants. This increase would be used by States to support 

implementation of NPDES CAFO programs, which should result in pollutant reductions 

of over 2 billion pounds annually,19 and to support State issuance of storm water permits, 

 

19 United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. (January 2001). Development 

Document for the Proposed Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Regulation 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-8 

resulting in long term annual reductions of approximately 100 billion pounds of 

sediment.20

Water Quality Trading: Water quality trading is a watershed approach based on 

voluntary partnerships at the local level. It capitalizes on economies of scale and control 

cost differences among sources, by allowing one source to meet its regulatory obligation 

by using pollutant reductions created by another source that has lower pollution control 

costs. Trading provides incentives for voluntary pollutant reductions, especially from 

sources that are not regulated. It encourages early reductions and more cost effective 

programs for restoring impaired waters. Trading also provides incentives for innovative 

solutions to complex and diverse water quality problems across the nation. 

A current example of a successful trading effort between point sources can be 

found on Long Island Sound, where nitrogen trading among publicly owned treatment 

works in Connecticut is expected to save over $200 million in control costs. A March 

2003, report by the World Resources Institute, states that market mechanisms such as 

nutrient trading provide the greatest overall environmental benefits and a cost-effective 

strategy for reducing the Mississippi River Basin’s contribution to the Dead Zone in the 

Gulf of Mexico. The report highlights the fact that trading provides a real opportunity for 

farmers to play a role in reducing nutrient pollution.21

In FY 2005, we plan to redirect $4 million for this effort, to be set-aside within the 

Targeted Watershed Grants. 

Water Efficiency: At the end of 2002, nearly half the continental U.S. was in drought.22 

In addition to reduced rainfall, most of our water systems also face a growing population 

and a growing economy. In the future, our waters are going to be even more stretched 

across competing demands. The Agency is committed to helping States and local 

governments address a multi-billion dollar gap between water and wastewater 

infrastructure needs and available capital financing over the next 20 years. 

One way to reduce national water and wastewater infrastructure needs is by 

reducing water demand and wastewater flows, allowing for deferral or downsizing of 

capital projects. In addition to reduced infrastructure needs, less water demand may 

result in many environmental benefits including maintaining stream flows, protecting 

aquatic habitats, avoiding overdrawn aquifers, conserving sources of supply, and 

mitigating drought effects. In anticipation of these benefits, we are proposing to develop 

and implement a water efficiency market enhancement program that would promote 

 

and the Effluent Guidelines for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. (EPA-821-R-01-003). 

Washington, D.C. [On-line] Available: http://epa.gov/waterscience/guide/ 20 U.S. EPA, Office of Water. “Economic Analysis of the Final Phase II Storm Water Rule,” EPA 833-R-99-

002, October 1999. 

U.S. EPA, Office of Water. “Construction and Development Effluent Guideline Proposed Rule,” Federal 

Register Notice (June 24, 2002). Accessed December 29, 2003. Available on the internet at: 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/construction/rule.html 

21 Greenhalgh, Suzie and Amanda Sauer. 2003. "Awakening the 'Dead Zone': An Investment for 

Agriculture, Water Quality, and Climate Change." World Resources Institute. 22 The Drought Monitor; National Drought Mitigation Center; Website: 

www.drought.unl.edu/dm/about.html
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-9 

recognition of water–efficient products based on the highly successful Energy Star 

Program. The Budget includes nearly $1 million for this new program. 

Surface Water Protection & Drinking Water Programs

Sustainable Infrastructure: Closing the infrastructure gap requires actions and 

innovations to reduce the demand for infrastructure, including better management, 

conservation (or smart water use), and intergovernmental cooperation through the 

watershed approach. 

 The touchstone of a long-term strategy to manage and maintain the Nation’s 

infrastructure is fiscal sustainability. An important component of this strategy is 

promoting sustainable water and wastewater treatment systems. This includes ensuring 

the technical, financial, and managerial capacity of water and wastewater systems; 

helping service providers avoid future gaps and expanding watershed approaches that 

engage stakeholders in broad-based action-oriented partnerships to identify efficient and 

effective local infrastructure solutions by adopting sustainable management systems to 

improve efficiency and economies of scale; and reducing the average cost of service. 

Through a $2.5 million sustainable infrastructure initiative, we will work in partnership 

with States, the utility industry, and other stakeholders to enhance the operating 

efficiencies of water and wastewater systems. These efficiencies can help systems 

make the infrastructure investments needed to meet growing consumer demand, and 

help to sustain the human health and environmental gains we have achieved over the 

past three decades. 

In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to coordinate with States and Tribes 

providing guidance and assistance in the development of generic and specific Pesticide 

Management Plans in order to protect our ground water resources. EPA will coordinate 

pesticide water issues and assist our partners in identifying and implementing effective 

ground water protection programs through these plans. The Agency will continue to 

support efforts on identifying the adverse effects of pesticides in ground and surface 

water at the State, Tribal and Regional levels. Additionally, we will continue to assist 

States and Tribes in identifying, developing and implementing measures to prevent or 

reduce water contamination. Key to this effort will be tailoring preventive and recovery 

measures to localities and specific pesticides. 

Research 

In FY 2005, EPA’s drinking water research program will continue to conduct research to 

reduce the uncertainties of risk associated with exposure to microbial contaminants in drinking 

water and improve analytical methods to control risks posed by drinking water contamination. 

The drinking water research program will continue to focus on chemical and microbial 

contaminants on current and future CCLs. Significant data gaps still exist on the occurrence of 

harmful microbes in source and distribution system water, linkages between water exposure 

and infection, and the effectiveness of candidate treatment technologies to remove and 

inactivate these contaminants. Efforts will also continue to support arsenic-specific research 

and development of more cost-effective treatment technologies for the removal of arsenic from 

small community drinking water systems. 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-10 

 EPA is working to develop biological and landscape indicators of ecosystem condition, 

sources of impairment, stressor response/fate and transport models, and options for managing 

stressors and their sources. Through the development of a framework for diagnosing adverse 

effects of chemical pollutants in surface waters, EPA will be able to evaluate the risks posed by 

chemicals that persist in the environment and accumulate in the food chain, threatening wildlife 

and potentially human health. The Agency will also develop and evaluate more cost-effective 

technologies and approaches for managing sediments, and evaluate management options for 

watershed restoration of TMDLs for other significant stressors (e.g., nutrients, pathogens and 

toxic compounds). Finally, research to address uncertainties associated with determining and 

reducing the risks to human health of the production and application of treated wastewater 

sludge (biosolids) to land for use as fertilizers and soil conditioners is emerging as an area of 

renewed importance for the Agency. 

 Another area of research will focus on growing evidence of the risk of infectious 

diseases resulting from exposure to microbes in recreational waters. Exposure to these 

diseases is of particular concern after major rainfall events that cause discharges from both 

point and non-point sources. These events may pose risks to human and ecological health 

through the uncontrolled release of pathogenic bacteria, protozoans, and viruses, as well as a 

number of potentially toxic, bioaccumulative contaminants. EPA will develop and validate 

effective watershed management strategies and tools for controlling wet weather flows (WWFs), 

which will enable EPA to provide states with consistent monitoring methods, standardized 

indicators of contamination, and standardized definitions of what constitutes a risk to public 

health. 

EXTERNAL FACTORS

 EPA’s strategies for achieving clean and safe water depend on substantial contributions 

and investments by many public and private entities. 

 States are primary partners in implementation of both clean water and safe drinking 

water programs. Many states, however, are facing budget problems and even deficits. EPA 

recognizes that state budget shortfalls are an external factor that may limit progress toward 

clean and safe water goals. 

 Consistent with the federal government’s unique trust responsibility to federally 

recognized tribes, EPA implements programs in Indian country, helps build tribal capacity to 

administer clean and safe water programs, and works with authorized tribes as co-regulators. 

Unlike states, many tribes are still developing programs to administer clean and safe water 

programs. . 

 Local governments play a critical role in implementing clean and safe water programs, 

and the continued participation of local government in these programs is critical to cleaner, safer 

water. Municipalities and other local entities have proven to be strong partners with states and 

the federal government in the financing of wastewater treatment and drinking water systems, 

and continued partnership in financing these systems is essential to meeting water goals. 

Municipalities are taking on additional responsibilities for addressing storm water and combined 

sewer overflows and they are adopting sustainable management practices to extend the useful 

lives of their wastewater infrastructure. Approximately 78 percent of wastewater treatment 
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water 

2-11 

plants are operated by small communities, thousands of which have had past operational 

difficulties.23 Continued assistance to these small treatment plants, through the Wastewater 

Operator Training Program, is important to keeping the nation’s waters clean. In the case of the 

drinking water program, effective local management of drinking water systems, including 

protection of source waters, is essential to maintaining high rates of compliance with drinking 

water standards. Ninety-five percent of the 160,000 or more public water systems responsible 

for meeting drinking water safety standards are small systems that face challenges in sustaining 

their capacity to provide safe drinking water.24 Strong partnerships with local governments are 

critical to achieving clean and safe water goals. 

 Several key components of the national water program, including nonpoint source 

control, source water protection, and watershed management, as well as the core water quality 

and drinking water standards, monitoring, TMDLs and NPDES permitting programs require 

broad partnerships among many federal, state, and local agencies. Over the next several 

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

agricultural agencies, and local conservation districts) is a top priority for meeting clean water 

goals. We must continue to provide EPA water quality data and work with USDA to help target 

runoff control programs’ resources. 

 States lead the effort in water quality monitoring. However, EPA relies on many other 

agencies to provide monitoring data to measure progress toward its goal of clean and safe 

water, such as the U.S Geological Survey, which maintains water monitoring stations 

throughout the nation, and NOAA, which provides information on coastal waters. EPA relies on 

the continued collection of data by these agencies. 

 Additionally, all of the EPA’s coastal and oceans activities are carried out in partnership 

with other federal agencies, and, in some cases, international, state, local and private entities as 

well. EPA relies on its work with the Department of Defense, Coast Guard, Alaska and other 

states, and a number of cruise ship and environmental and non-governmental organizations 

regarding regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to managing wastewater discharges from 

vessels. Meeting ocean and coastal goals will also depend on the extent to which the growth in 

coastal areas is directed in ways that minimize effects on water quality. 

West Nile Virus cases increased dramatically in 2002, spreading across 38 states and 

the District of Columbia. In areas with new West Nile virus detections, EPA regional offices 

have reported heightened concern about the pesticides used for mosquito control and the 

adverse affect it might have in contaminating groundwater. Pesticides are applied to areas 

where groundwater is prevalent due to the fact that mosquitoes need stagnant or standing water 

to lay their eggs. The possibility of the West Nile Virus expanding into new areas of the United 

States in the future will require the application of more pesticides onto the new breeding areas 

 

23 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance; Permit 

Compliance System; Web-site: www.epa.gov/oeca/planning/data/water/pcssys.html 

24 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED), 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/data/getdata.html

Goal 3: Land Preservation 

and Restoration
This page intentionally left blank 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

3-1 

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

Strategic Goal: Preserve and restore the land by using innovative waste management 

practices and cleaning up contaminated properties to reduce risks posed by releases of harmful 

substances. 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000)

 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget 

FY2005 

President’s 

Budget Difference

1 - Preserve Land $210,990 $237,150 $26,160 

2 - Restore Land $1,508,647 $1,503,466 ($5,181)

3 - Enhance Science and Research $59,837 $57,556 ($2,281)

 Goal 3 Total $1,779,473 $1,798,171 $18,697 

 

Workyears 4,745 4,708 (36)

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

Left uncontrolled, 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. Hazardous substances can kill living organisms in lakes and rivers, destroy vegetation in 

contaminated areas, cause major reproductive complications in wildlife, and otherwise limit the 

ability of an ecosystem to survive. 

MEANS AND STRATEGY

EPA will work to preserve and restore the land using the most effective waste 

management and cleanup methods available. EPA will use a hierarchy of approaches to 

protect the land: reducing waste at its source, recycling waste, and managing waste effectively 

by preventing spills and releases of toxic materials and cleaning up contaminated properties. 

The Agency is especially concerned about threats to our most sensitive populations, such as 

children, the elderly, and individuals with chronic diseases. 

23.2% of Budget
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

3-2 

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA, or Superfund) 25 and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 26

provide the legal authority for most of EPA’s work toward this goal. The Agency and its partners 

use Superfund authority to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites; return 

the land to productive use; and maximize the participation of potentially responsible parties 

(PRPs) in cleanup efforts. Under RCRA, EPA works in partnership with states and Tribes to 

address risks associated with leaking underground storage tanks and with the generation and 

management of hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. 

EPA also uses authorities provided under the Clean Air Act, 27Clean Water Act, 28 and 

Oil Pollution Act of 1990 29 to protect against spills and releases of hazardous materials. 

Controlling the many risks posed by accidental and intentional releases of harmful substances 

presents a significant challenge to protecting the land. EPA’s approach integrates prevention, 

preparedness, and response activities to minimize these risks. Spill prevention activities keep 

harmful substances from being released to the environment. Improving its readiness to respond 

to emergencies, through training, development of clear authorities, and provision of proper 

equipment, will ensure that EPA is adequately prepared to minimize contamination and harm to 

the environment when spills do occur.

In FY 2005, EPA will maintain its focus on three themes established in FY 2004, and one 

additional theme on emergency preparedness, response and homeland security, in achieving its 

objectives: 

 Recycling, Waste Minimization and Energy Recovery: EPA’s strategy for reducing 

waste generation and increasing recycling is based on (1) establishing and expanding 

partnerships with businesses, industries, states, communities, and consumers; (2) 

stimulating infrastructure development, environmentally responsible behavior by product 

manufacturers, users, and disposers (“product stewardship”), and new technologies; and 

(3) helping businesses, government, institutions, and consumers by education, outreach, 

training, and technical assistance. 

 One Cleanup Program: Through the "One Cleanup Program" the Agency is looking 

across its programs to bring consistency and enhanced effectiveness to site cleanups. 

The Agency will work with its partners and stakeholders to enhance coordination, 

planning, and communication across the full range of Federal, state, Tribal, and local 

cleanup programs. This effort will improve the pace, efficiency, and effectiveness of site 

cleanups, as well as more fully integrate land reuse and continued use into cleanup 

programs. The Agency will promote information technologies that describe waste site 

cleanup and revitalization information in ways that keep the public and stakeholders fully 

informed. Finally, the Agency will develop environmental outcome performance 

measures that report progress among all cleanup programs, such as the number of 

acres able to be reused after site cleanup. A crucial element to this effort is a national 

 

25 42 U.S. Code 9601-9675 

26 42 U.S. Code 6901-6992k 

27 42 U.S. Code 7401-7671q 28 33 U.S. Code 1251-1387 

29 33 U.S. Code 2701-2761 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

3-3 

dialogue, currently underway, on the future of Superfund and other EPA waste cleanup 

programs. 

 Revitalization: The Agency’s broad promotion of the successes of the Brownfields and 

other waste programs focuses on restoring and revising contaminated lands. The Land 

Revitalization Initiative complements the Agency's traditional cleanup programs by 

focusing on solutions that improve the quality of life and economy of affected 

communities. Front end planning for the final, productive use of contaminated lands 

enables the cleanup programs, communities and interested stakeholders to more easily 

and quickly make cleanup decisions. This integration of land reuse planning with the 

traditional cleanup processes will lead to faster, more efficient cleanups. 

 Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Homeland Security: EPA has a major 

role in reducing the risk to human health and the environment posed by accidental or 

intentional releases of harmful substances and oil. EPA will work to improve its ability to 

effectively respond to these incidents, working closely with other Federal agencies within 

the National Response System. 

Means and Strategies for Preserving Land 

Reducing and Recycling Waste: The Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) 

represents a major national effort to find flexible yet protective ways to conserve our 

valuable natural resources by reducing waste, recycling, and recovering energy. 30

Through the RCC, EPA challenges all Americans to make purchasing and disposal 

decisions that conserve natural resources, save energy, reduce costs, and preserve the 

environment for future generations. 

Establishing and Expanding Partnerships: EPA will establish and expand its 

partnerships with industry, states, and other entities to reduce waste and to develop and 

deliver tools that can help businesses, manufacturers, and consumers. Nationallyrecognized programs, such as WasteWise, 31 which uses partnerships to encourage 

waste prevention and recycling, will serve as models for new alliances among Federal, 

state, and local governments and businesses that capitalize on voluntary efforts to 

reduce waste and increase recycling. 

 EPA will also continue to help its Tribal partners improve practices for managing 

solid waste on Indian lands. EPA has direct implementation responsibility for the RCRA 

hazardous waste and Underground Storage Tank programs in Indian country. 

Recognizing the unique challenges encountered in Indian country, EPA will work with 

Tribes on a government-to-government basis that affirms the Federal government’s vital 

trust responsibility and the importance of conserving natural resources for cultural uses. 

 

30 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Resource Conservation Challenge Web 

Site: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/index.htm. Washington, D.C. Last updated August 21, 

2003. 

31 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. WasteWise Program Web Site, About 

Waste Wise Page: http://www.epa.gov/wastewise/wrr/cbuild.htm. Washington, D.C. Last updated 

September 27, 2002. 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

3-4 

EPA will conduct joint projects to upgrade Tribal solid waste management infrastructure, 

developing plans, codes and ordinances, recycling programs, and other alternatives to 

open dumping. These efforts will help to prevent open dumping in Indian country in the 

future and allow clean up of existing dumps, reducing the risks that such dumps pose to 

human health and the environment. 

Stimulating Infrastructure Development, Product Stewardship, and New Technologies: 

Another key strategy for reducing waste is fostering development of infrastructure that 

will make it easier for businesses and consumers to reduce the waste they generate; 

acquire and use recycled materials; and purchase products containing recovered 

materials. For example, EPA has established voluntary product stewardship 

partnerships with manufacturers, retailers, governmental, and nongovernmental 

organizations to reduce the impacts that electronics and carpets can have on the 

environment throughout their lifecycles. EPA continues to promote the development of 

new and better recycling technologies and explore ways to obtain energy or products 

from waste. 

Providing Education, Outreach, Training, and Technical Assistance: EPA works 

with major retailers, electronics manufacturers, and the amusement and motion picture 

industries to revitalize, create, and display conservation, waste prevention, and recycling 

messages. These activities encourage smarter, more environmentally responsible 

behavior by consumers, young people, and underserved communities. The Agency and 

its partners design activities that encourage students and teachers to start innovative 

recycling programs and develop unique tools and projects to promote waste reduction, 

recycling, and neighborhood revitalization in Hispanic and African-American 

communities and on Indian lands. 

Managing Hazardous Wastes and Petroleum Products Properly 

 Recognizing that some hazardous wastes cannot yet be completely eliminated or 

recycled, the RCRA program works to reduce the risks of exposure to hazardous wastes by 

maintaining a “cradle-to-grave” approach to waste management. 

Preventing Hazardous Releases from RCRA Facilities: EPA’s strategy for 

addressing hazardous wastes that must be treated or stored is to achieve greater 

efficiencies at waste management facilities through more focused permitting processes 

and tighter standards where appropriate. EPA works with state, Tribal, and local 

government partners to ensure that hazardous waste management facilities have 

approved controls in place and continues to strive for safe waste management. 

 EPA will work with the authorized states—specifically those with a large number 

of facilities lacking approved controls in place— to resolve issues and transfer best 

practices from other states. EPA also plans to study the universe of unpermitted 

facilities and work with states to identify and resolve issues that may be preventing key 

categories of facilities from obtaining permits or putting other approved controls in place. 

To achieve greater efficiencies at facilities that treat or store hazardous waste, the 

Agency will promote innovative technologies that streamline permitting processes and 

improve protection of human health and the environment. 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

3-5 

Reducing Emissions from Hazardous Waste Combustion: EPA continues to 

develop and issue regulations on emission standards for hazardous waste combustion 

facilities. Implementation of these regulations is key to reducing the emission of dioxins, 

furans, particulate matter, and acid gases. Within 2 years from the date when EPA 

issues new limits, facilities will conduct emission tests to demonstrate reductions. 

Additional periodic tests will ensure continued compliance with the limits established for 

emissions. 

Preventing Releases from Underground Storage Tank Systems: EPA recognizes 

that the size and diversity of the regulated community put state authorities in the best 

position to regulate Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) and to set priorities. RCRA 

Subtitle I allows state UST programs approved by EPA to operate in lieu of the Federal 

program. 32 Except in Indian country, even states that have not received formal state 

program approval from EPA are in most cases the primary implementing agencies and 

receive annual grants from EPA. 

 While the frequency and severity of releases from UST systems have been 

greatly reduced, EPA and its state partners have observed that releases are still 

occurring. EPA will continue to work with its state and Tribal partners to prevent and 

detect petroleum releases from USTs by ensuring that compliance with detection 

prevention requirements (spill, overfill, and corrosion protection) are a national priority. 

While the vast majority of the approximately 683,000 active USTs have the regulatory 

equipment, significant work remains to ensure that UST owners and operators maintain 

and operate their systems properly. 33 In FY 2005, the Agency will continue its 

performance evaluation of new or upgraded UST systems to better and more quickly 

identify releases and their causes. The Agency will also continue to identify 

opportunities for improving UST system performance. 

 To protect our Nation’s groundwater and drinking water from petroleum releases, 

EPA will continue to support state programs; strengthen partnerships among 

stakeholders; and provide technical and compliance assistance, and training to promote 

and enforce UST facilities’ compliance. In addition, EPA will continue its work to obtain 

states’ commitments to increase their inspection and enforcement presence if statespecific goals are not met. The Agency and states will use innovative compliance 

approaches, along with outreach and education tools, to bring more tanks into 

compliance. 

 The Agency will also provide guidance to foster the use of new technology to 

enhance compliance. For example, the presence of methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether (MTBE) 

in gasoline increases the importance of preventing and rapidly detecting releases, since 

MTBE cleanups can cost 100 percent more than cleanups involving other gasoline 

 

32 42 U.S. Code 9601-6992k 

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

Underground Storage Tank Division Directors in EPA Regions 1-10. June 19, 2003. F^ 2003 Semi 

Annual (Mid-Year) Activity Report 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

3-6 

contaminants. 34 The Agency will focus its efforts on reducing UST releases and 

increasing early detection of petroleum products, including MTBE, by further evaluating 

the performance of compliant UST systems. 

Means and Strategies for Restoring Land

Preparing for and Responding to Emergencies 

EPA plays a major role in reducing the risks that accidental and intentional releases of 

harmful substances and oil pose to human health and the environment. Under the National 

Response System (NRS), EPA evaluates and responds to thousands of releases annually. The 

NRS is a multi-agency preparedness and response mechanism that includes the following key 

components: the National Response Center, the National Response Team (NRT) which is 

composed of 16 Federal agencies, 13 Regional Response Teams, and Federal On-Scene 

Coordinators (OSCs). These organizations work with state and local officials to develop and 

maintain contingency plans that will enable the Nation to respond effectively to hazardous 

substance and oil emergencies. When an incident occurs, these groups coordinate with the 

OSC in charge to ensure that all necessary resources, such as personnel and equipment, are 

available and that containment, cleanup, and disposal activities proceed quickly, efficiently, and 

effectively. EPA’s primary role in the NRS is to serve as the Federal OSC for spills and 

releases in the inland zone. As a result of NRS efforts, the Nation has successfully contained 

many major oil spills and releases of hazardous substances, minimizing the adverse impacts on 

human health and the environment. 

Preparing for Emergencies: Preparedness on a national level is essential to ensure 

that emergency responders are able to deal with multiple, large-scale emergencies, 

including those that may involve chemicals, oil, biological agents, or radiological 

incidents. Over the next several years, EPA will enhance its core emergency response 

program to respond quickly and effectively to chemical, oil, biological, and radiological 

releases. EPA also will improve coordination mechanisms to respond to simultaneous, 

large-scale national emergencies, including homeland security incidents. The Agency 

will focus its efforts on Regional Response Teams and coordination among Regions; 

health and safety issues, including provision of clothing that protects and identifies 

responders, training, and exercise; establishment of delegation and warrant authorities; 

and response readiness, including equipment, transportation, and outreach. The criteria 

for excellence in the core emergency response program will ensure a high level of 

overall readiness throughout the Agency and improve its ability to support multi-Regional 

responses. 

 In addition to enhancing its readiness capabilities, EPA will work to improve 

internal and external coordination and communication mechanisms. For example, as 

part of the National Incident Coordination Team, EPA will continue to improve its 

policies, plans, procedures, and decision-making processes for coordinating responses 

to national emergencies. Under the Continuity of Operations/Continuity of Government 

 

34 New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission. 2000. A Survey of Site Experiences with 

MTBE Contamination at LUST Sites. Web Site: http:// epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/current. 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

3-7 

program, EPA will upgrade and test plans, facilities, training, and equipment to ensure 

that essential government business can continue during a catastrophic emergency. 

NRT capabilities are being expanded to coordinate interagency activities during largescale responses. EPA will coordinate its activities with the Department of Homeland 

Security, Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), Federal Bureau of 

Investigation (FBI), other Federal agencies, and state and local governments. EPA will 

also continue to clarify its roles and responsibilities so that Agency security programs are 

consistent with the national homeland security strategy. 

Responding to Hazardous Substance Releases and Oil Spills: Each year, EPA 

personnel assess, respond to, mitigate, and clean up thousands of releases, whether 

accidental, deliberate, or naturally occurring. These incidents range from small spills at 

chemical or oil facilities to national disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes, to 

terrorist events like the 2001 World Trade Center and anthrax attacks, to the 2003 

Columbia shuttle tragedy. 

 EPA will work to improve its capability to respond effectively to incidents that may 

involve harmful chemical, oil, biological, and radiological substances. The Agency will 

explore improvements in field and personal protection equipment and response training 

and exercises; review response data provided in the “after-action” reports prepared by 

EPA emergency responders following a release; and examine “lessons learned” reports 

to identify which activities work and which need to be improved. Application of this 

information and other data will advance the Agency’s state-of-the-art emergency 

response operations. 

Preventing Oil Spills: An important component of EPA’s land strategy is to prevent oil 

spills from reaching the Nation’s waters. Under the Oil Pollution Act, 35the Agency 

requires certain facilities (defined in 40 CFR 112.2) to develop and implement spill 

prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plans. SPCC plans ensure that 

facilities put in place containment and other countermeasures to prevent oil spills from 

reaching navigable waters. Facilities that are unable to provide secondary containment, 

such as berms around an oil storage tank, must provide a spill contingency plan that 

details cleanup measures to be taken if a spill occurs. Compliance with these 

requirements reduces the number of oil spills that reach navigable waters and prevents 

detrimental effects on human health and the environment should a spill occur. 

Controlling Risks to Human Health and the Environment at Contaminated Sites 

 Leaching contaminants can foul drinking water in underground aquifers used for wells or 

surface waters used by public water intakes. Contaminated soil can result in human ingestion 

or dermal absorption of harmful substances. Contamination can also affect subsistence 

resources, including resources subject to special protections through treaties between Federal 

and Tribal governments. Furthermore, because of the risks it poses, contaminated land may 

not be available for use. 

 EPA and its partners work to clean up contaminated land to levels sufficient to control 

risks to human health and the environment and to return the land to productive use. The 

 

35 33 U.S. Code,6901-6992k
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

3-8 

Agency’s cleanup activities, some new and some well-established, include removing 

contaminated soil, capping or containing contamination in place, pumping and treating 

groundwater, and bioremediation. 

 EPA uses a variety of tools to accomplish cleanups: permits, enforcement actions, 

consent agreements, Federal Facility Agreements, and many other mechanisms. As part of 

EPA’s One Cleanup Program Initiative, all levels of government will work together to ensure that 

appropriate cleanup tools are used; that resources, activities, and results are coordinated with 

partners and stakeholders and communicated to the public effectively; and that cleanups are 

protective and contribute to community revitalization. This approach reflects EPA’s efforts to 

coordinate across all of its cleanup programs, while maintaining the flexibility needed to 

accommodate differences in program authorities and approaches. 

 EPA fulfills its cleanup and waste management responsibilities on Tribal lands by 

acknowledging Tribal sovereignty and recognizing Tribal governments as being the most 

appropriate authorities for setting standards, making policy decisions, and managing programs 

consistent with Agency standards and regulations. 

 Through strong policy, leadership, program administration, and a dedicated workforce, 

EPA’s cleanup programs will merge sound science, cutting-edge technology, quality 

environmental information, and stakeholder involvement to protect the Nation from the harmful 

effects of contaminated property. To accomplish its cleanup goals, the Agency continues to 

forge partnerships and develop outreach and education strategies. 

 EPA and its partners follow four key steps to accomplish cleanups and control risks to 

human health and the environment: assessment, stabilization, selection of appropriate 

remedies, and implementation of remedies. The Agency will continue to work with its Federal, 

state, Tribal, and local government partners at each step of the process to identify facilities and 

sites requiring attention and to monitor changes in priorities. For example, EPA is collecting 

Tribal program baseline data for the Superfund program and will modify the Superfund data 

system to more accurately track sites of concern to Tribes, along with those situated on Indian 

lands. As systems and approaches change, cleanup programs will revise guidance 

appropriately. 

 Usable land is a valuable resource. However, where contamination presents a real or 

perceived threat to human health and the environment, options for future land use at that site 

may be limited. EPA’s cleanup programs have set a national goal of returning formerly 

contaminated sites to long-term, sustainable, and productive use. This goal creates greater 

impetus for selecting and implementing remedies that, in addition to providing clear 

environmental benefits, will support future land use providing greater economic and social 

benefits. 

Maximizing Potentially Responsible Party Participation at Superfund Sites 

 Enforcement authorities play a critical role in all Agency cleanup programs. However, 

they have an additional and unique role under the Superfund program: they are used to 

leverage private-party resources to conduct a majority of the cleanup actions and to reimburse 

the federal government for cleanups financed by the Trust Fund. EPA will continue to pursue 

the following two strategies for limiting the use of trust funds. 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

3-9 

Applying Superfund “Enforcement First”: Historically, EPA has achieved at least $6 

in private-party cleanup commitments for every $1 spent on enforcement. The Agency 

will continue to use its enforcement authorities to achieve this end. The Superfund 

program’s “Enforcement First” strategy will allow EPA to focus limited Trust Fund 

resources on sites where viable, potentially responsible parties either do not exist or lack 

the funds or capabilities to conduct the cleanup. By taking enforcement actions at sites 

where viable, liable parties do exist, EPA will continue to leverage private-party dollars 

so that Trust Fund money is used only when absolutely necessary to clean up 

hazardous waste sites. 

Recovering Costs: Cost recovery is another way to leverage private-party resources 

through enforcement. Under Superfund, EPA has the authority to compel private parties 

to pay back Trust Fund money spent to conduct cleanup activities. EPA will continue its 

efforts to address 100 percent of the Statute of Limitations cases for Superfund sites 

with unaddressed total past costs equal to or greater than $200,000 and to report the 

value of costs recovered. 

Means and Strategies

Research 

 The FY 2005 land research program supports the Agency’s objective of reducing or 

controlling potential risks to human health and the environment at contaminated waste sites by 

accelerating scientifically-defensible and cost-effective decisions for cleanup at complex sites, 

mining sites, marine spills, and Brownfields in accordance with the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act (CERCLA). 

The Agency will conduct research to: 1) improve the range and scientific foundation for 

contaminated sediment remedy selection options through improved site characterization, and 

increased understanding of different remedial options; 2) determine the performance and cost 

benefit of alternative groundwater remediation technologies and provide tools for characterizing 

and assessing groundwater contamination to program offices for use in state and local remedial 

decisions; 3) provide tools and methods that will allow the Agency to accurately and efficiently 

assess, remediate, and manage soil and land contamination; and 4) provide tools, methods, 

and models, and technical support to characterize the extent of multimedia site contamination. 

 Multimedia decision-making, waste management, and combustion constitute the three 

major areas of research under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in FY 

2005, as the Agency works toward preventing releases through proper facility management. 

Multimedia research will focus on resource conservation (e.g., electronic waste recycling and 

waste-derived products), corrective action, and multimedia modeling. Waste management 

research will develop more cost-effective ways to manage/recycle non-hazardous wastes and 

will examine other remediation technologies, while combustion research will continue to focus 

on characterizing and controlling emissions from bioreactors and industrial combustion systems. 

 Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality waste research program at 

EPA. The Research Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC) of EPA’s Science Advisory Board 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

3-10 

(SAB), an independent chartered Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) committee, meets 

annually to conduct an indepth review and analysis of EPA’s Science and Technology account. 

The RSAC provides its findings to the House Science Committee and sends a written report on 

the findings to EPA’s Administrator after every annual review. Moreover, EPA’s Board of 

Scientific Counselors (BOSC) provides counsel to the Assistant Administrator for the Office of 

Research and Development (ORD) on the operation of ORD’s research program. Also, under 

the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, all research projects are selected for funding 

through a rigorous competitive external peer review process designed to ensure that only the 

highest quality efforts receive funding support. Our scientific and technical work products must 

also undergo either internal or external peer review, with major or significant products requiring 

external peer review. The Agency’s Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures 

and guidance for conducting peer review. 

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS

 Preserve Land. By 2008, reduce adverse effects to land by reducing waste generation, 

increasing recycling, and ensuring proper management of waste and petroleum products 

at facilities in ways that prevent releases. 

 Restore Land. By 2008, control the risks to human health and the environment by 

mitigating the impact of accidental or intentional releases and by cleaning up and 

restoring contaminated sites or properties to appropriate levels. 

 Enhance Science and Research. Through 2008, provide and apply sound science for 

protecting and restoring land by conducting leading-edge research and developing a 

better understanding and characterization of environmental outcomes under Goal 3. 

HIGHLIGHTS

 In FY 2005, EPA and its partners will preserve and restore the land by reducing, 

recycling, and managing wastes, preventing and responding to releases of harmful substances, 

and cleaning up contaminated land. The following accomplishments are examples of what has 

been done by the Agency to achieve these purposes: 

 completed 303,120 cleanups of confirmed releases from Federally-regulated LUSTs 

since 1987; 

 conducted over 7,900 removal response actions from 1982 through January 6, 2004; 

 completed clean up construction at 890 Superfund National Priorities List Sites through 

January 6, 2004; 

 assessed over 45,300 potential Superfund sites through January 6, 2004; 

 removed more than 33,400 sites from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) waste site list; 

 responded to or monitored 300 oil spills in a typical year; 

 699 construction projects are ongoing at over 430 sites; 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

3-11 

 expanded the Waste Wise Partnership to more than 1,300 partners who recycled over 9 

million tons of waste, and prevented over 400,000 tons of waste; 

 enrolled 50 Coal Combustion Products Partners, who are investigating ways to increase 

the use of coal combustion products (CCPs) in construction and to promote other 

beneficial uses of CCPs; 

 determined that an investment of $1 million in Jobs Through Recycling grants helped 

businesses create more than 1,700 jobs and $290 million in capital investment; 

 provided over $6.0 million to thirty-one Tribes to clean up open dumps and $3.1 million 

to 47 Tribes to develop hazardous waste management programs through the Tribal Solid 

Waste Interagency Workgroup; 

 developed e-permitting tools to expedite and simplify the permitting process and provide 

better public access to permitting information; 

 financial assurance regulations reduced the number of sites that must be cleaned up 

under either state or Federal authorities (such as Superfund removals) by requiring 

facilities to have financial assurance for third party liability, closure, and completion of 

corrective action; 

 83 percent of hazardous waste facilities have approved controls (permits) in place, 

exceeding the 2005 goal of 80 percent; 

 the “worst facilities first” strategy resulted in over 1,200 facilities achieving the Current 

Human Exposures Under Control environmental indicator goal and over 1,000 facilities 

achieving the Migration of Contaminated Groundwater Under Control environmental 

indicator goal; 

 secured greater than $20 billion in PRP commitments, through response and cost 

recovery settlements, over the life of the Superfund program; and 

 resolved potential liability of 24,700 small volume waste contributing parties through 

more than 475 de minimis settlements. 

Research 

In FY 2005, contaminated sites research will: 1) reduce uncertainties associated with 

soil/groundwater sampling and analysis; 2) reduce the time and cost associated with site 

characterization and site remediation activities; and 3) develop and demonstrate more effective 

and less costly remediation technologies involving complex sites and hard-to-treat wastes. 

Other proposed work will enhance and accelerate current contaminated sediments research 

efforts, providing the data needed to make and support crucial decisions on high impact and 

high visibility sites. The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program fosters 

the development and use of lower cost and more effective characterization and monitoring 

technologies, as well as risk management remediation technologies for sediments, soils, and 

groundwater. In FY 2005, EPA will complete at least four SITE demonstrations, with emphasis 

on non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) and sediments. 

 

Waste management research in FY 2005 will work to advance the multimedia modeling 

and uncertainty/sensitivity analyses methodologies that support core RCRA program needs as 

well as emerging RCRA resource conservation needs. Waste management research will also 

be conducted to improve the management of both solid and hazardous wastes. 
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration 

3-12 

EXTERNAL FACTORS

EPA’s ability to respond as the Federal On-Scene Coordinator for releases of harmful 

substances in the inland zone will be affected by several external factors. The National 

Response System ensures that EPA will respond when necessary, but relies heavily on the 

ability of responsible parties and state, local, and Tribal agencies to respond to most 

emergencies. The need for EPA to respond is a function of the quantity and severity of spills 

that occur, as well as the capacity of state, local, and Tribal agencies to address spills. 

EPA’s ability to respond to homeland security incidents may be affected by 

circumstances surrounding each event. For instance, if travel or communication is severely 

impeded, EPA’s response may be delayed and its efficiency compromised. Also, in the case of 

a single large-scale incident, removal program resources will most likely be concentrated on that 

response, thus reducing EPA’s ability to address other emergency releases. In severe cases, 

EPA’s current emergency response workforce and resources may not be sufficient to address a 

large number of simultaneous large-scale incidents. 

A number of external factors could also affect the Agency’s ability to achieve its 

objectives for cleanup and prevention. These factors include Agency reliance on private-party 

response and state and Tribal partnerships, development of new environmental technologies, 

work by other Federal agencies, and statutory barriers. Achieving the release prevention 

objectives and attaining FY 2005 targets will depend heavily on the participation of states that 

have been authorized or approved to be the primary implementors of these programs. 

Attaining EPA’s waste reduction and recycling objectives will depend on the participation 

of Federal agencies, states, Tribes, local governments, industries, and the general public in 

partnerships aimed at reducing waste generation and increasing recycling rates. EPA provides 

national leadership in the areas of waste reduction and recycling to facilitate public and private 

partnerships that can provide the impetus for government, businesses, and citizens to join in the 

campaign to significantly reduce the amount of waste generated and ultimately sent for 

disposal. Further, both domestic and foreign economic stresses can adversely affect markets for 

recovered materials. 

State programs are primarily responsible for implementing the RCRA Hazardous Waste 

and UST programs. EPA’s ability to achieve its goals for these programs depends on the 

strength of state programs, including the level of funding contributed by states to these 

programs. 

 The Agency’s ability to achieve its goals for Superfund construction completion is 

partially dependent upon the performance of cleanup activities by the Department of Defense 

(DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE). In addition to construction completion, the 

Agency must rely on the efforts of DOD and DOE to establish and maintain Restoration 

Advisory Boards (RABs) and Site Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs). RABs and SSABs provide 

a forum for stakeholders to offer advice and recommendations on the restoration of Federal 

Facilities. Program success also partly depends on private party response and State 

partnerships, development of new environmental technology, work by other federal agencies, 

and statutory barriers. Further, EPA also coordinates its activities with other entities, such as 

PRP negotiations and agreements with states and Tribes. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities 

and Ecosystems 
This page intentionally left blank 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-1 

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

Strategic Goal: Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities, and 

ecosystems using integrated and comprehensive approaches and partnerships.

Resource Summary 

($ in 000)

 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget 

FY2005 

President’s 

Budget Difference

1 - Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide 

 Risks $364,129 $383,305 $19,176 

2 – Communities $317,573 $319,958 $2,385 

3 – Ecosystems $160,698 $200,845 $40,146 

4 - Enhance Science and Research $420,041 $394,824 ($25,217)

Goal 4 Total $1,262,441 $1,298,932 $36,491 

 

Workyears 3,824 3,850 26

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

 To promote healthy communities and ecosystems, EPA must bring together a variety of 

programs, tools, approaches and resources. The support of a multitude of stakeholders, along 

with strong partnerships with Federal, State, Tribal and local governments, are necessary to 

achieve the Agency’s goal of protecting, sustaining or restoring healthy communities and 

ecosystems. The Agency’s goal of achieving healthy communities and ecosystems will be 

accomplished by focusing both on stressors to human health and the environment and the 

locations at most risk from environmental problems. 

 A key component of this goal is protecting human health and the environment by 

identifying, assessing, and reducing the potential risks presented by the thousands of chemicals 

on which our society and economy have come to depend. These include the pesticides we use 

to meet national and global demands for food, and the industrial and commercial chemicals 

found throughout our homes, our workplaces, and the products we use. 

 Some pest-control methods that are used to ensure an abundant and affordable food 

supply can cause unwanted environmental or health effects if not used and managed properly. 

Apart from its role in agriculture, effective pest control is also essential in homes, gardens, 

16.7% of Budget
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-2 

rights-of-ways, hospitals, and drinking water treatment facilities. Pesticides are an important 

part of pest management in each of these settings. EPA licenses pesticides to help ensure they 

can be used safely and beneficially while avoiding unintended harm to our health or 

environment. EPA must also address the emerging challenges posed by a growing array of 

biological organisms—naturally occurring and, increasingly, genetically engineered—that are 

being used in industrial and agricultural processes. 

 Agriculture accounts for about 80 percent of all conventional pesticide applications. 

Herbicides are the most widely used pesticides and account for the greatest expenditure and 

volume, approximately $6.4 billion and 534 million pounds in 1999. Biopesticides and reduced 

risk pesticides are assuming an increasingly important role. For example, safer pesticides, 

which include biopesticides and reduced risk pesticides, increased in use from 3.6 percent in 

1998 to 7.5 percent of total pounds reported for 2002. 

Biological agents are potential weapons that could be exploited by terrorists against the 

United States. EPA’s pesticides antimicrobial program has been very responsive to addressing 

this threat. Antimicrobials play an important role in public health and safety. EPA is conducting 

comprehensive scientific assessments and developing test protocols to determine product 

safety and efficacy of products used against chemical and biological weapons of mass 

destruction, and registering products as necessary. EPA is also developing a timeline for 

prioritizing and implementing the tests. 

 EPA programs under this Goal have many indirect effects that significantly augment the 

stream of benefits they provide. For example, each year the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA) New Chemicals program reviews and manages the potential risks from approximately 

1,800 new chemicals and 40 products of biotechnology that enter the marketplace. Since its 

inception, approximately 17,000 new chemicals reviewed by the program have entered United 

States commerce. This new chemical review process not only protects the public from the 

possible immediate threats of harmful chemicals like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from 

entering the marketplace, but it has also contributed to changing the behavior of the chemical 

industry, making industry more aware and responsible for the impact these chemicals have on 

human health and the environment. 

 Americans come into daily contact with any number of chemicals that entered the market 

before the New Chemicals Program was established in 1978, yet relatively little is known about 

many of their potential impacts. Getting basic hazard testing information on large volume 

chemicals is one focus of EPA’s work in the Existing Chemicals program. The voluntary High 

Production Volume program challenges industry to develop chemical hazard data critical to 

enabling EPA, State, Tribes, and the public to screen chemicals already in commerce for any 

risks they may be posing. Risks of other chemicals, such as lead or PCBs are well known, and 

EPA’s responsibility centers on reducing exposure through proper handling or disposal. 

The Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs) Program was designed by EPA to 

provide scientifically credible data to directly support chemical emergency planning, response, 

and prevention programs mandated by Congress. Emergency workers and first responders 

need to know how dangerous a chemical contaminant may be to breathe or touch, and how 

long it may remain dangerous. The program develops short-term exposure limits applicable to 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-3 

the general population for a wide range of extremely hazardous substances (approximately 400) 

for purposes related to chemical terrorism and chemical accidents. 

In addition to addressing human health and ecosystems and stressors such as 

chemicals and pesticides, this goal also focuses on those geographic areas with human and 

ecological communities at most risk. For example the Mexican Border is an area facing unique 

environmental challenges. At the Mexican Border, EPA addresses local pollution and 

infrastructure needs that are priorities for the Mexican and the U.S. governments under the 

Border 2012 agreement. 

As the population in coastal regions grows the challenges to preserve and protect these 

important ecosystems increase. Through the National Estuary Program, coastal areas have 

proved valuable grounds for combining innovative and community-based approaches with 

national guidelines and inter-agency coordination to achieve results. 

Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, comparable to rain 

forests and coral reefs. Yet the nation loses an estimated 58,000 acres per year, and existing 

wetlands may be degraded by excessive sedimentation, nutrient enrichment, and other 

factors.36 

In 2001 the Supreme Court determined that some isolated waters and wetlands are not 

regulated under the Clean Water Act. Many waters with important aquatic values may no longer 

be covered by CWA Section 404 protections. 

Large water bodies like the Gulf of Mexico, the Great Lakes, and the Chesapeake Bay 

are surrounded by industrial and other development and have been exposed to substantial 

pollution over many years at levels higher than current environmental standards permit. As a 

result, the volume of pollutants in these water bodies has exceeded their natural ability to 

restore balance. Working with stakeholders, EPA has established special programs to protect 

and restore these unique resources by addressing the vulnerabilities for each. 

 EPA’s continued enforcement efforts will be strengthened through the development of 

measures to assess the impact of enforcement activities and assist in targeting areas that pose 

the greatest risks to human health and the environment, display patterns of noncompliance, and 

include disproportionately exposed populations. In addition, the EPA’s enforcement program 

supports Environmental Justice effort by focusing enforcement actions and criminal 

investigations on industries that have repeatedly violated environmental laws in minority and/or 

low-income areas. 

Further, EPA’s Brownfields Initiative funds pilot programs and other research efforts; 

clarifies liability issues; enters into Federal, state and local partnerships; conducts outreach 

activities; and creates job training and workforce development programs. 

 

36 Dahl, T.E. 1990. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States, 1986 to 1997. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available online at: 

http://wetlands.fws.gov/bha/SandT/SandTReport.html: Report to Congress on the Status and Trends of 

Wetlands in the Conterminous United States, 1986 to 1997. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-4 

 EPA’s environmental justice program will continue education, outreach, and data 

availability initiatives. The Program provides a central point for the Agency to address 

environmental and human health concerns in minority and/or low-income communities--a 

segment of the population that has been disproportionately exposed to environmental harms 

and risks. The program will continue to manage the Agency’s Environmental Justice 

Community Small Grants Program that assists community-based organizations working to 

develop solutions to local environmental issues. 

 The Agency will continue to support the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council 

(NEJAC) which provides the Agency significant input from interested stakeholders such as 

community-based organizations, business and industry, academic institutions, state, Tribal and 

local governments, non-governmental organizations and environmental groups. The Agency 

will also continue to chair an Interagency Working Group (IWG) consisting of eleven 

departments and agencies, as well as representatives of various White House offices, to ensure 

that environmental justice concerns are incorporated into all Federal programs. 

Research 

EPA has a responsibility to ensure that efforts to reduce potential environmental risks 

are based on the best available scientific information. Strong science allows identification of the 

most important sources of risk to human health and the environment as well as the best means 

to detect, abate, and avoid possible environmental problems, and thereby guides our priorities, 

policies, and deployment of resources. It is critical that research and scientific assessment be 

integrated with EPA’s policy and regulatory activities. In order to address complex issues in the 

future, the Agency will design and test fundamentally new tools and management approaches 

that have potential for achieving environmental results. Under Goal 4, EPA will conduct 

research in many areas, including emerging areas such as biotechnology and computational 

toxicology, to help develop better understandings and characterizations of positive 

environmental outcomes related to healthy communities and ecosystems. 

EPA uses several noteworthy mechanisms to ensure scientific relevance, quality, and 

integration as it seeks to produce sound environmental results. For example, EPA’s Science 

Advisor is responsible for advising the EPA Administrator on science and technology issues to 

support Agency programs, policies, procedures, and decisions. Also, EPA uses its Science 

Advisory Board (SAB), an independently chartered Federal Advisory Committee Act committee, 

to conduct annual, in-depth reviews and analyses of EPA’s Science and Technology account. 

The SAB provides its findings to the House Science Committee and reports findings to EPA’s 

Administrator after every annual review. Under the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) 

program, all research projects are selected for funding through a rigorous, competitive, and 

external peer review process designed to ensure that only the highest quality efforts receive 

funding support. All EPA scientific and technical work products must undergo either internal or 

external peer review, with major or significant products requiring external peer review. The 

Agency also uses a Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) which codifies procedures and 

guidance for conducting quality EPA peer reviews. Taken together, these mechanisms serve to 

ensure EPA’s research and science remains relevant and committed to achieving superior 

environmental results. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-5 

MEANS AND STRATEGY

In coordination with our State and Tribal co-regulators and co-implementers and with the 

support of industry, environmental groups, and other stakeholders, EPA will use multiple 

approaches to address risks associated with chemicals and pesticides. Improving communities’ 

ability to address local problems is a critical part of our efforts to reduce risk. 

 The Agency’s strategy for reducing the risks of exposures to pesticides and industrial 

chemicals is based on: 

 Identifying and assessing potential risks from chemicals, pesticides, and 

microorganisms; 

 Setting priorities for addressing these risks; 

 Developing and implementing strategies aimed at preventing risks and managing those 

risks that cannot be prevented; 

 Implementing regulatory measures, such as systematic review of pesticides and new 

chemicals, and developing and implementing procedures for safe production, use, 

storage, and handling of chemicals, pesticides, and microorganisms; 

 Employing innovative voluntary measures, such as promoting the use of reduced-risk 

pesticides and challenging companies to assess and reduce chemical risks and develop 

safer and less polluting new chemicals, processes, and technologies; and 

 Conducting outreach and training, and establishing partnerships. 

Pesticides Management 

EPA has the responsibility under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA) and the Federal Food and Drug Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to set terms and conditions of 

pesticide registration, marketing and use. EPA will use these authorities to reduce risk from 

residues of pesticides, particularly those pesticides with the highest potential to cause harm to 

human health and the environment, including those which pose particular risks to children and 

other susceptible populations. All new pesticides are reviewed for registration through an 

extensive review and evaluation of human health and ecosystem studies and data, applying the 

most recent scientific advances in risk assessment. The Registration program includes 

registration activities, such as setting tolerances, registering new active ingredients and new 

uses, and handling experimental use permits and emergency exemptions. 

New registration actions result in more pesticides on the market that meet the strict Food 

Quality Protection Act (FQPA) pesticide risk-based standards, which brings the Agency closer to 

the objective of reducing adverse risks from pesticide use. In 2005, the Agency will continue to 

promote accelerated registrations for pesticides that provide improved risk reduction or risk 

prevention compared to those currently on the market. Progressively replacing older, higherrisk pesticides is one of the most effective methods for curtailing adverse impact on health and 

the ecosystem while preserving food quality and production rates. EPA measures adoption of 

the reduced-risk pesticides by tracking the amount of acres treated --- or “acre treatments” --- 

using reduced risk pesticides. By 2005, an estimated 8.7 percent of total acre-treatments are

expected to use reduced-risk pesticides. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-6 

Another priority is to review older pesticides in applying the FQPA safety standards. We 

will complete pesticide reregistration eligibility decisions by 2008 (food use by 2006) and, in 

tandem with that work, meet our FQPA statutory goal of reassessing 9,721 existing tolerances 

by August 2006. The Strategic Agricultural Partnership Initiative and the Pesticide 

Environmental Stewardship Program collaborate with USDA, States, and non-governmental 

organizations to demonstrate integrated pest management strategies that reduce pesticide 

residues in the environment. 

Pesticide and pest control issues extend beyond the farm. Public health officials and 

homeowners use pesticides to control a variety of pests, protect human health, and benefit 

consumers. Through our regulatory programs, EPA reviews all pesticides with the goal of 

minimizing pesticide exposure and risk. For example, as of 2002, children’s exposure to 

organophosphates – an older, riskier class of pesticide – was reduced by 60 percent through 

the elimination of many uses in and around the house. EPA registers antimicrobials used by 

public drinking water treatment facilities and by food processing plants and hospitals to disinfect 

surfaces. Effective antimicrobials are of growing importance as many serious disease-causing 

organisms become resistant to our antibiotic procedures. To provide environmental, public 

health, and economic benefits, we will continue addressing risk from older pesticides, making

new pesticides available and addressing emergency health or pest damage issues flexibly and 

efficiently. 

Biotechnology has presented the Agency with a range of new issues and scientific 

challenges as well. Outreach activities on the subject of biotechnology such as public meetings 

and scientific peer reviews of our policies and assessments are likely to be expanded to keep 

pace with changing science and the public’s demand for information in this area. EPA is

working closely with other Federal agencies involved in biotechnology. Adoption of 

biotechnology has great potential to reduce reliance on some older, more risky chemical 

pesticides, and to lower worker risks. For example, the use of Bt cotton has reduced the use of 

other insecticides that present higher risk to wildlife. 

Toxic Chemicals 

Three primary approaches comprise EPA’s strategy to prevent and reduce risks that 

may be posed by chemicals and microrganisms: 

 Preventing the introduction into U.S. commerce of chemicals and organisms that pose 

unreasonable risks; 

 Effectively screening the stock of chemicals already in use for potential risk; and 

 Developing and implementing action plans to reduce use of and exposure to chemicals 

that have been demonstrated to harm humans and the environment. 

 

EPA intends to work with States and Tribes, other Federal agencies, the private sector, 

and international entities to implement this strategy and, in particular, to make protecting 

children and the aging population a fundamental goal of public health and environmental 

protection. 

TSCA requires that EPA review all new chemicals and organisms prior to their 

production or import and be notified of significant new uses for certain chemicals that have 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-7 

already been reviewed.37 While TSCA gives EPA a 90-day review period, new criteria, such as 

preventing the introduction of persistent bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs) or considering the use of 

new chemicals as potential weapons of terror, continue to emerge. An expanded set of 

screening tools will increase EPA’s and industry’s efficiency by using the limited data that 

companies provide in their Pre-manufacturing Notice (PMN) submissions to predict potential 

hazards, exposures, and risks quickly and effectively. 

In 2005, EPA will continue to make progress in screening, assessing, and reducing risks 

posed by the 66,600 chemicals that were in use prior to the enactment of TSCA. Thousands of 

these chemicals are still used today, and nearly 3,000 of them are “high production volume” 

(HPV) chemicals, produced or imported in quantities exceeding one million pounds per year. 

Approximately 300 companies and 100 consortia are voluntarily providing data covering over 

2,200 of the more than 2,800 chemicals included in the HPV Challenge Program.38 EPA will 

make the data publicly available and screen for potential hazards and risks. We will then 

identify and set priorities for further assessment, and determine the need to take action to 

eliminate or effectively manage the risks identified. To support these efforts, we will draw on 

data already obtained through the TSCA Inventory Update Rule39, particularly on new exposurerelated data to be provided beginning in 2005.

In certain instances, risk-reduction efforts are targeted at specific chemicals. Foremost 

among these is the Federal government’s commitment to eliminate the incidence of childhood 

lead poisoning. Since 1973, we have reduced environmental lead levels by phasing out leaded 

gasoline and addressing other sources of lead exposure. Since the 1990’s, EPA has focused 

on reducing children’s exposure to lead in paint and dust through a regulatory framework and by 

educating parents and the medical community about prevention.40 EPA’s efforts, combined with 

those of other Federal agencies, has led to a 50 percent drop in the number of children in the 

U.S. that have elevated blood levels, to approximately 400,000 children. 

EPA is employing a multimedia, cross-Agency strategy to focus on other high-risk 

chemicals and classes of chemicals. For example, we are working to prevent new PBTs from 

entering commerce and to reduce risks associated with PBTs, including mercury, that are 

currently in use or that have been used in the past. In addition, recommendations will be 

provided to EPA in 2004 from a panel of national experts on asbestos that will assist the Agency 

in designing strategies to address remaining asbestos risks. We will expand successful pilots to 

encourage companies to retire from service large capacitors and transformers containing PCBs 

to meet ambitious new targets for safe disposal by 2008. 

 

37 Toxic Substances Control Act Section 5: Manufacturing and Processing Notices, Public Law 94-469, October 11, 

1976 

38 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, High Production Volume Challenge Program, HPV 

Commitment Tracking System. Available at http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/viewsrch.htm. 

39 U.S. EPA website, www.epa.gov/opptintr/iur; Title 40 CFR Part 710, Subpart A

40 See www.epa.gov/lead 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-8 

U.S./Mexican Border 

To reduce environmental and human health risks along the U.S./Mexico Border, EPA 

employs both voluntary and regulatory measures. Efforts include a series of workgroups that 

focus on priority issues ranging from water infrastructure and hazardous waste to outreach 

efforts focusing on communities and businesses in the border area. The programs were initially 

conceived in a Federal-to-Federal context. Today, it is clear that in both countries, non-Federal 

governments are the appropriate entities for developing and carrying out much of the work of 

protecting the border environment. The experience of the last six years has shown U.S. border 

states as key participants in workgroup activities with similar experience on the Mexico side. 

In the past year, all border states have stressed the need for greater decentralization of 

environmental authority, and in FY 1999, states and the Federal governments agreed to a set of 

principles that clarify the roles of the governments and advance State and Tribal participation. 

Under a new environmental plan developed with SEMARNAP (EPA’s Mexican counterpart), 

completed in April 2003, the States and Tribes will play a more substantial and meaningful role 

in: 

 determining how Federal border programs are developed and funded; 

 developing regional workgroups that empower border citizens; and 

 ensuring that programs devolve from Mexico’s Federal government to the Mexican 

states, with corresponding funding. 

Ecosystems 

EPA will work with Federal, state, Tribal, local, and private sector partners to achieve our 

ecosystem objectives. Through continuing emphasis on partnerships and innovation, we will 

protect and restore coastal water quality through the National Estuary Program and related 

coastal watershed support. In coordination with the Corps of Engineers, EPA will improve the 

CWA Section 404 program to achieve no net loss of wetlands by avoiding, minimizing and 

compensating for losses. With an emphasis on community-based restoration, EPA will 

contribute to the goal of no net loss of wetlands. 

Great Lakes Strategy 2002, developed by EPA and Federal, state, and Tribal agencies 

in consultation with the public, advances U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 

implementation. Its long-range vision for a healthy natural environment where all beaches are 

open for swimming, all fish are safe to eat, and the Lakes are protected as a safe source of 

drinking water, is supported by Lakewide Management Plans (LaMPs) and Remedial Action 

Plans (RAPs) for Areas of Concern (AOCs). 

Work in the Chesapeake Bay is based on a unique regional partnership formed to direct 

and conduct restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. Partners include Maryland, Virginia and 

Pennsylvania; the District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission; EPA; and 

participating citizen advisory groups. A comprehensive and far-reaching agreement, 

Chesapeake 2000, will guide restoration and protection efforts through 2010. The agreement 

focuses on improving water quality as the most critical element in the overall protection and 

restoration of the Bay and its tributaries. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-9 

EPA’s efforts in the Gulf of Mexico represent a broad, multi-organizational partnership 

based on the participation of business and industry, agriculture, local government, citizens, 

environmental and fishery interests, Federal agencies, and five Gulf States. The partners 

voluntarily identify key environmental problems and work at the regional, state, and local level to 

define and recommend solutions. 

Brownfields 

 Brownfields are defined as real properties, where expansion, redevelopment, or reuse 

may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, 

or contaminant. Brownfields include abandoned industrial and commercial properties, drug 

labs, mine-scarred land, and sites contaminated with petroleum or petroleum products. The 

Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (SBLRBRA), signed into law in 

2002, expands Federal grants for assessment, cleanup, and job training. To encourage 

revitalization and reuse of brownfield sites, the law limits the legal liability of prospective 

purchasers, innocent land holders, and contiguous property owners related to brownfield 

properties. In addition, the law provides for establishing and enhancing state and Tribal 

response programs, which play a critical role in successfully cleaning up and revitalizing 

brownfields. 

 Brownfields grants will continue to provide communities with vital assessment, cleanup, 

revolving-loan fund, and job-training support. Brownfields assessment grants provide funding to 

inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct planning and community involvement activities 

related to brownfields. Brownfields revolving-loan fund grants provide funding for a grantee to 

capitalize a revolving loan and make subgrants to carry out cleanup activities. Cleanup grants, 

newly authorized by the Brownfields Law, will fund cleanup activities by grant recipients. 

Expanded authorities within the new law also address the potential for limited funding for 

institutional controls, insurance, and health monitoring. EPA will provide limited funding for 

grants that provide technical assistance, training, and research to Brownfields communities. 

EPA will also provide funding to create local environmental job training programs, ensuring that 

the economic benefits derived from Brownfields revitalization efforts remain in the community. 

 EPA will continue to work in partnership with state cleanup programs to address 

brownfield properties. The Agency will provide states and Tribes with tools, information, and 

funding they can use to develop response programs that will address environmental 

assessment cleanup, characterization, and redevelopment needs at sites contaminated with 

hazardous wastes and petroleum. The Agency will continue to encourage the empowerment of 

state, Tribal, and local environmental and economic development officials to oversee brownfield 

activities and the implementation of local solutions to local problems. 

Research 

EPA is continuing to ensure that it is a source of strong scientific and technical 

information, and that it is on the leading edge of environmental protection innovations that will 

allow achievement of its strategic objectives. The Agency consults a number of expert sources, 

both internally and externally, and uses several deliberative steps in planning its research 

programs. As a starting point, the Agency draws input from multi-year plans, EPA’s Strategic 

Plan, available research plans, EPA program offices and Regions, Federal research partners, 

and peer advisory bodies such as the Science Advisory Board (SAB) and others. Agency
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-10 

teams prioritize research areas by examining risk and other factors such as National Science 

and Technology Council (NSTC) research, client office priorities, court orders, and legislative 

mandates. EPA’s research program will increase understanding of environmental processes 

and capabilities to assess environmental risks to both human health and ecosystems. 

To enable the Agency to enhance science and research for healthy people, 

communities, and ecosystems through 2008, EPA will engage in high priority, multidisciplinary 

research efforts to improve understanding of the risks associated with: 1) human health and 

ecosystems; 2) climate change; 3) pesticides and toxics; 4) computational toxicology; 5) 

endocrine disruptors; 6) mercury, and 7) homeland security. Following is a summary of the 

means and strategies to meet the Agency’s long-term objectives in these areas. 

 EPA’s human health research represents the Agency’s only comprehensive program to 

address the limitations in human health risk assessment. Scientists across the Agency will use 

the measurement-derived databases, models, and protocols developed through this research 

program to strengthen the scientific foundation for human health risk assessment. In addition, 

global change, loss and destruction of habitat due to sprawl and exploitation of natural 

resources, invasive species, non-point source pollution, and the accumulation and interaction of 

these effects present emerging ecological challenges. EPA will conduct research to strengthen 

its ability to assess and compare risks to ecosystems, protect and restore them, and track 

progress toward optimal ecological outcomes. 

EPA designs its Climate Change research program in collaboration with the other 

agencies participating in the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). This research focuses 

on assessing potential direct and indirect effects of climate change on human health, air quality, 

water quality, and aquatic ecosystems; identifying and quantifying the uncertainties associated 

with those effects; and comparing potential climate change effects with effects caused by other 

stressors. 

 Research under the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) builds on earlier research to 

reduce scientific uncertainty in risk assessment. This research will provide data needed to 

develop refined aggregate and cumulative risk assessments, develop the appropriate safety 

factors to protect children and other sensitive populations, refine risk assessments, and provide 

risk mitigation technologies. By 2008, EPA will provide scientific tools that can be used to 

characterize, assess, and manage risks associated with the implementation of FQPA. 

 The Agency will conduct additional research on pesticides and toxics that support the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances Control 

Act (TSCA), designed to enhance the Agency’s human health and ecological risk assessment 

and risk management capabilities. Efforts will include the development of predictive tools used 

in testing requirements, research on probabilistic risk assessment methods, biotechnology, and 

other areas of high interest and utility to the Agency. 

 To enhance the scientific basis and diagnostic/predictive capabilities of existing and 

proposed chemical testing programs, EPA’s Computational Toxicology (CT) Research Program 

will use in vitro or other approaches such as molecular profiling, bioinformatics, and quantitative 

structure-activity relationships. These alternative approaches, in conjunction with highly 

sophisticated computer-based models and research results, will greatly reduce the use of 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-11 

animal testing to obtain chemical toxicity information. To support our regulatory mandates, 

endocrine disruptors research will focus on improving EPA’s scientific understanding of 

exposures to, effects of, and management of endocrine-disruptor chemicals. Research in direct 

support of EPA’s screening and testing programs will evaluate current testing protocols and 

develop new protocols to evaluate potential endocrine effects of environmental agents. The 

Agency will also conduct research to determine impacts that endocrine-disrupting chemicals 

may have on humans, wildlife, and the environment. 

A 1997 EPA Mercury Study Report to Congress discussed the magnitude of mercury 

emissions in the United States and concluded that a plausible link exists between human 

activities that release mercury from industrial and combustion sources in the United States and 

methylmercury concentrations in humans and wildlife. The Agency will conduct risk 

management research for managing emissions from coal-fired utilities (critical information for 

rule-making) and non-combustion sources of mercury; on the fate and transport of mercury in 

the atmosphere; for assessing methylmercury in human populations; and for developing risk 

communication methods and tools. 

EPA’s Homeland Security research program will expand knowledge of potential threats, 

as well as its response capabilities, by assembling and evaluating private sector tools and 

capabilities. Preferred response approaches will be identified, promoted, and evaluated for 

potential future use by first responders, decision makers, and the public. The Agency will be 

working closely with other federal and outside organizations to fill gaps in this critical research 

area. EPA’s research will focus on preparedness, risk assessment, detection, containment, 

decontamination and disposal of chemical and biological attacks water systems. 

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS

Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide Risks 

 Ensure new pesticide registration actions (including new active ingredients and new 

uses) meet new health standards and are environmentally safe. 

 Increase percentage of acre treatments that will use reduced-risk pesticides. 

 Decrease occurrence of residues of carcinogenic and cholinesterase-inhibiting neuortic 

pesticides on foods eaten by children from their 1994 to 1996 average. 

 Ensure that through ongoing data reviews, pesticide active ingredients, and products 

that contain them, are reviewed to assure adequate protection for human health and the 

environment, taking into consideration exposure such as subsistance lifestyles of the 

Native Americans. 

 Standardize and validate screening assays. 

 Reduce from 1995 levels the number of incidents involving mortalities to nontargeted 

terrestial and aquatic wildlife caused by pesticides. 

 Reduce exposure to and health effects from priority industrial and commercial 

chemicals. 

 Identify, restrict, and reduce risks associated with industrial and commercial chemicals. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-12 

Ecosystems 

 Support wetlands and stream corridor restoration and management and 

assessment/monitoring of overall wetland health. 

 Support projects with the goal of creating, restoring or protecting 2400 acres of important 

coastal and marine habitats per year in the Gulf of Mexico. 

 Assist the Gulf States in implementing watershed restoration actions in priority impaired 

coastal river and estuary segments. 

 Improve Great Lakes ecosystem components, including progress on fish contaminants, 

beach closures, air toxics and trophic status. 

 Improve the aquatic health of the Chesapeake Bay. 

 By 2005, working with partners, achieve no net loss of wetlands.

Community Health 

 Empower states, Tribes, local communities and other stakeholders in economic 

redevelopment to work together to prevent, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse 

Brownfields. 

 Through December 2003, the Brownfields program has awarded 552 Brownfields 

assessment grants, over 171 Brownfields revolving loan funds and 50 cleanup grants, 

and 66 job training grants. 

 Assess 1,000 Brownfields properties, 

 Clean up 60 properties using Brownfields funding, 

 Leverage $1.0 billion in cleanup/redevelopment funding, 

 Leverage 5,000 jobs. 

 Train 200 participants, placing 65 percent in jobs. 

Science and Research 

 Establish and maintain Centers of Applied Science to provide technical assistance and 

coordination of applied research activities addressing the latest needs of stakeholders. 

 Provide high quality exposure, effects and assessment research results that support the 

August 2006 reassessment of current-use pesticide tolerances, so that, by 2008, EPA 

will be able to characterize key factors influencing children’s and other subpopulations’ 

risks from pesticide exposure. 

 By 2005, provide risk assessors and managers with methods and tools for measuring 

exposure and effects in children. 

 By 2005, provide technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects to restore 

riparian zones, so that, by 2010, watershed manages have state-of-the-science field 

evaluation tools, technical guidance and decision-support systems. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-13 

 Through 2005, initiate or submit to external review 28 human health assessments and 

complete 12 human health assessments through the Integrated Risk Information System 

(IRIS). 

HIGHLIGHTS

Chemical, Organism and Pesticide Risks

Pesticide Registration: In 2005, the Agency will continue its efforts to decrease the 

risk to the public from pesticide use through the regulatory review of new pesticides. 

EPA expedites the registration of reduced risk pesticides, which are generally presumed 

to pose lower risks to consumers, workers, the ozone layer, groundwater, and wildlife. 

These accelerated pesticide reviews provide an incentive for industry to develop, 

register, and use lower risk pesticides. Additionally, the availability of these reduced risk 

pesticides provides alternatives to older, potentially more harmful products currently on 

the market. 

Biological agents are potential weapons that could be exploited by terrorists 

against the United States. EPA’s pesticides antimicrobial program is working to help 

address this threat. Antimicrobials play an important role in public health and safety. 

EPA is conducting comprehensive scientific assessments and developing test protocols 

to determine the safety and efficacy of products used against chemical and biological 

weapons of mass destruction, and registering products as necessary. EPA is also 

developing a timeline for prioritizing and implementing the tests. 

Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration: The 1996 Food Quality Protection Act 

requires the reassessment of existing pesticide tolerances by 2006. A tolerance is the 

amount of pesticide residue that may legally remain on a food. Pesticide reregistration is 

a statutory requirement under the 1988 amendments to FIFRA. Under the law, all 

pesticides registered prior to November 1984 must be reviewed to ensure that they meet 

current health and safety standards. Many pesticides must be reviewed under both 

statutes. Additional program requirements and priorities within FQPA include:

 Review of inert ingredients; 

 Reform of the antimicrobial review process; 

 Transparency of our regulatory decisions; 

 Incorporation of aggregate and cumulative risk into our reviews; 

 Special protection for infants and children; 

 Screening of pesticides for endocrine disrupting effects; 

 Enhancements to minor use program; and 

 Emphasis on registration of reduced risk pesticides 

In the Pesticides program, the main focus, our primary goal, and our largest 

public commitment is to meet the final statutory goal for completing tolerance 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-14 

reassessment by August 3, 2006. Additional resources of $4,400,000 are requested in 

this program to complete food use reregistration work necessary for the Agency to 

complete tolerance reassessments by 2006 as required by FQPA. These resources will 

support completion of conventional pesticides, inerts, biopesticides and antimicrobial 

reviews. The reviews can take several years to complete, therefore FY 2005 is the last 

opportunity to ensure the Agency has the resources to meet the 2006 FQPA deadline. 

In FY 2005, the Agency will continue its review of older pesticides and move 

forward toward its ten-year statutory deadline of reassessing all 9,721 tolerances. EPA 

met its first two statutory deadlines under FQPA for tolerance reassessment. The 

tolerance reassessment process addresses the highest-risk pesticides first. Using data 

surveys conducted by USDA, FDA and other sources, EPA has identified a group of “top 

20" foods consumed by children and matched those with the tolerance reassessments 

required for pesticides used on those foods. The Agency is tracking its progress in 

determining appropriate tolerances for these pesticides under the FQPA standards. In 

2005, EPA will continue its effort to reduce dietary risks to children by completing 

approximately 93 percent (cumulative) of these children’s tolerances of special concern. 

Through the Reregistration program, EPA reviews pesticides currently on the 

market to ensure they meet the latest health standards. Pesticides not in compliance 

with the standards will be eliminated or restricted in order to minimize potentially harmful 

exposure. FQPA added considerably more complexity to the pesticide reregistration 

process, lengthening the "front end" of reregistration. These requirements include 

considering aggregate and cumulative risk in our risk assessments, implementing new 

processes to increase involvement of pesticide users and other stakeholders, and 

ensuring a reasonable opportunity for agriculture to make the transition to new, safer 

pest control tools and practices. 

In 2005, EPA will work toward completing 40 Reregistration Decisions41, 400 

product reregistrations and 1000 tolerance reassessments. The Agency will also 

continue to develop tools to screen pesticides for their potential to disrupt the endocrine 

system. Over the longer run, these changes will enhance protection of human health 

and the environment. 

Appropriate transition strategies to reduced risk pesticides are important to the 

nation to avoid disruption of the food supply or sudden changes in the market that could 

result from abruptly terminating the use of a pesticide before well-targeted reduced risk 

equivalents can be identified and made available. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue 

efforts to reach more farmers and grower groups, encourage them to adopt safer 

pesticides, and use environmental stewardship and integrated pest management 

practices. These outreach efforts play pivotal roles in moving the nation to the use of 

safe pest control methods, including reduced risk pesticides. These programs promote 

risk reduction through collaborative efforts with stakeholders to use safer alternatives to 

traditional chemical methods of pest control. 

 

41 Reregistration Decisions include Reregistration Eligibility Decisions [REDs], Tolerance Reregistration 

Eligibility Decisions [TREDs] and Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decisions [IREDs]). 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-15 

Endangered Species: Also in FY 2005, the Agency is requesting additional resources 

of $1,000,000 for the Endangered Species program. The Agency has been working with 

the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to improve the 

review process on the potential impact of pesticides on endangered species. Efforts 

include elevating the level of detail of specificity in risk assessments to more realistically 

predict risks to endangered species populations; developing a compendium of species 

biology, food and habitat requirements, listing specification and recovery efforts; 

ensuring implementation of applicable label provisions; and supporting State and Tribal 

entities in protecting endangered species. This funding will be used mainly by the 

states for assisting in the implementation of these improvements.

 

Endocrine Disruptors: EPA’s Endocrine Disruptors Screening Program (EDSP) was 

established in response to an FQPA requirement, and to growing concerns in the 

scientific community about observed adverse effects in wildlife and their potential 

relationship to human effects. The program’s primary objectives are to establish 

validated assays and scientifically-supported tools for testing chemicals for possible 

adverse effects to the endocrine system. FQPA requires that Avalidated@ assays be 

used in the Screening Program, but at passage in 1996, available endocrine effects test 

methods were principally experimental and none had been validated. EPA has spent 

the past several years standardizing a defined set of assays and establishing their 

relevance and reliability. The long-term outcomes of the EDSP will be a baseline 

estimate of the degree of endocrine disruption occurring from environmental chemicals, 

and a way to measure the risk. 

High Production Volume Challenge Program: EPA’s High Production Volume (HPV) 

Challenge Program, established in cooperation with industry, environmental groups, and 

other interested parties, works to ensure that critical human health and environmental 

effects data on approximately 2,800 HPV chemicals are screened and made publicly 

available. HPV chemicals are defined as industrial chemicals that are manufactured or 

imported into the United States in volumes of one million pounds or more each year. 

Through this program, EPA asks industry to voluntarily sponsor HPV chemicals for 

screening-level testing. Hazard test information on large volume chemicals is now more 

visible through the HPV website42, giving states, regions, and Tribes accessibility and 

the ability to share critical data and information. EPA’s screening efforts should be well 

under way by FY 2005 and are expected to result in follow up actions on five to ten 

percent of the chemicals screened. 

Lead Poisoning Prevention Activities: EPA is part of the Federal effort to address 

lead poisoning and elevated blood levels in children by assisting in, and in some cases 

guiding, Federal activities aimed at reducing the exposure of children in homes with 

lead-based paint. In 2005, EPA plans to proceed with a proposed rule on the de-leading 

of bridges and structures. Also, because much of the remaining incidence of lead 

poisoning occurs in low-income, urban areas, new public education initiatives will focus 

on these populations. EPA also plans to step up efforts with the private sector to 

 

42 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. "High Production 

Volume (HPV) Challenge Program." Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/volchall.htm.

Washington, DC. Accessed September 9, 2003. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-16 

increase knowledge and ability to work in a lead-safe manner as a normal part of doing 

business, and plans to ensure that special attention is paid to private sector (non-profit 

and for-profit) organizations working in high-impact areas. 

Risk Management Plans: Reducing chemical accidents is vital to ensure that 

communities are not exposed to hazardous materials. The Agency continues its efforts 

to help states and Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs) implement the risk 

management plan (RMP) program. In FY 2002, 398 RMP audits were conducted and 

the Agency continues to make steady progress in this area. In FY 2005, EPA will 

provide technical assistance grants, technical support, outreach, and training to state 

and LEPCs. Through these activities, states, local communities and individuals will be 

better prepared to prevent and prepare for chemical accidents. 

Community Health 

Brownfields: The Brownfields program is designed to empower states, Tribes, local 

communities and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together to 

prevent, assess, safely cleanup, and reuse Brownfields. Through December 2003, the 

Brownfields program has awarded 552 Brownfields assessment grants, over 171 

Brownfields revolving loan funds and 50 cleanup grants, and 66 job training grants. In 

FY 2005, working with its state, Tribal, and local partners to meet its objective to sustain, 

cleanup, and restore communities and the ecological systems that support them, EPA 

intends to assess 1,000 Brownfields properties, clean up 60 properties using Brownfields 

funding, leverage $1.0 billion in cleanup/redevelopment funding, leverage 5,000 jobs, 

and train 200 participants, placing 65 percent in jobs. 

Ecosystems 

National Estuary Program: EPA will continue to support protection and restoration 

efforts in high-priority ecosystems, including those covered by the National Estuary 

Program (NEP). Key NEP activities will include continued support for assessing status 

and trends, and implementation activities to restore and protect critical habitat. 

State and Tribal Grants: EPA will continue its grants to states and Tribes to help 

them protect wetlands made vulnerable by the SWANCC ruling as part of 

comprehensive programs that will achieve no net loss of wetlands, while also providing 

grant funding for states and Tribes to assume more decision-making authority in waters 

that remain subject to the CWA. 

Watersheds: Targeted geographic watershed initiatives are an important component of 

community-based environmental protection and restoration. In the Great Lakes, EPA 

will target additional resources to clean up contaminated sediments and strive to reduce 

PCB concentrations in lake trout and walleye. The emphasis in the Chesapeake Bay will 

be the restoration of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV). To achieve improved water 

quality and restore submerged aquatic vegetation, Chesapeake Bay partners have 

committed to reducing nutrient and sediment pollution loads sufficiently to remove the 

Bay and the tidal portions of its tributaries from the list of impaired waters. Continued 

implementation of core water programs and efforts to address the hypoxic zone will help 

to restore the waters of the Gulf of Mexico and its tributaries. 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-17 

Research for Human Health and Ecosystems 

In order to improve the scientific basis for identifying, characterizing, assessing, and 

managing environmental exposures that can pose the greatest health risks to the American 

public, EPA is committed to developing and verifying innovative methods and models for 

assessing the susceptibilities of sub-populations, such as children and the elderly, to 

environmental toxins. Since many of the current human health risk assessment methods, 

models, and databases are based on environmental risks for adults, this research is primarily 

aimed at enhancing current risk assessment and management strategies and guidance to better 

consider risk determination needs for children. 

In FY 2005, research will identify modes of action by which specific groups of 

chemicals/pesticides increase cancer or non-cancer health risks as a function of life stage, 

develop the necessary tools and models to characterize and conduct field studies on exposures 

to high-priority environmental chemicals in the elderly, and examine effects of pre-existing 

respiratory disease (e.g., asthma, bronchitis) on response to air pollutants. 

 

EPA will continue to generate exposure measurement and exposure factor data and 

establish methods to support the development, evaluation, and enhancement of models of 

aggregate exposures, dose, and effects. This research seeks to understand the key 

determinants of exposure and risk, improve exposure measurement techniques, and develop 

critical data on exposure and exposure factors. The results will be used to fill data gaps and 

reduce reliance on numerous default assumptions that are currently used in the risk assessment 

process, which will strengthen the scientific foundation for human health risk assessment. 

Additional research will provide regulatory decision-makers with models and guidance 

that will be used for conducting assessments for cumulative exposure and risks to pollutants 

that pose the greatest health risks to the American public. Activities for FY 2005 and beyond 

include: 1) developing and refining physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models for 

using exposure, biomarker, and PK data in risk assessments; 2) examining promising new 

biomarkers of exposure and effects that can be used in future exposure and epidemiological 

studies, such as the National Children’s Study (NCS); and 3) sponsoring research that will 

provide a framework for structuring evaluations of the toxicity of complex chemical mixtures for 

use in human and environmental health assessments. 

 

In order to balance the growth of human activity with the need to protect the 

environment, it is important to understand the current condition of ecosystems, what stressors 

are changing that condition, what the effects may be from those changes, and what can be 

done to prevent, mitigate, or adapt to those changes. In FY 2005, the Environmental Monitoring 

and Assessment Program (EMAP) will continue to be a major contributor to EPA’s 

environmental indicators report and will be instrumental in improving state contributions to the 

Agency’s bi-annual report to Congress on the condition of the Nation’s waters. Baseline 

ecological condition of Western streams will be determined so that, by 2008, a monitoring 

framework is available for streams and small rivers in the Western U.S. that can be used from 

the local to the national level for statistical assessments of condition and change to ecological 

resources. 

 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-18 

 Research will also provide technical guidance for implementing and evaluating projects 

to restore riparian zones, which are critical landscape components for the restoration of aquatic 

ecosystems and water quality. Research will include: (1) development, demonstration and 

technical support for monitoring designs, indicators, and interpretive analysis tools to allow 

States and Tribes to monitor and report the condition of water resources; (2) development of 

approaches to identify and test the linkages between probability-based and targeted water 

quality monitoring programs, landscape characteristics and the probability of water body 

impairment; (3) development of monitoring methods and decision support systems to improve 

our ability to identify probable causes of ecological impairment in streams; and (4) development 

of monitoring approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of programs to manage and restore 

aquatic resources in reaching performance objectives at site, regional, state and national 

scales. 

The Agency will continue research to assess the impacts of invasive species on U.S. 

ecosystems, including monitoring for invasive species as part of the Western EMAP program 

and the National Coastal Assessment, modeling zebra mussel influence on nutrients in Great 

Lakes Ecosystems, and developing a model for predicting where certain species will invade 

next. 

Research efforts in FY 2005 will continue to build on the Agency’s FY 2004 Clear Skies 

Research Initiative to identify where emerging control technologies and continuous 

measurement of mercury combustion sources can facilitate or optimize mercury emissions 

reduction. This research will also give support to the recent Utility Mercury Reductions proposal 

signed by Administrator Leavitt on December 15, 2003. 

EPA will increase efforts to implement information quality guidelines. While the Agency 

has extensive procedures in place to ensure that the information it disseminates meets high 

standards, further actions will be taken to ensure that such information is current and fully 

complies with the guidelines. In FY 2005, the Agency will establish an extramural mechanism to 

assist Regions in identifying external peer reviewers and securing their advice and assistance. 

Climate Change Research 

EPA’s Climate Change Research Program supports one of six Administration FY 2005 

Interagency Research and Development Priorities - Climate Change Science and Technology. 

All activities to assess potential impacts of global climate change will be developed and 

coordinated with the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). Attention is expected to be 

given to assessing the potential consequences of global change – including climate variability 

and change, land use changes, and UV radiation – on air quality, water quality, ecosystem 

health, and human health. The Agency will also assess potential adaptation strategies for 

building resilience to global change, while responding to both potential risks and opportunities. 

Research for Pesticides and Toxics 

EPA is continuing to build on research launched under the FY 2003 Biotechnology 

Initiative focusing on plant-incorporated protectants (PIP) crops. In FY 2005, the Agency will 

deliver a final report outlining the state-of-the-art in tools for monitoring resistance development 

in the field and the use of target pest ecology to refine Insect Resistance Management 

strategies, as they are determined in risk assessment practice. This report will focus on data 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-19 

gaps in pest biology, ecology, and population dynamics related to insect resistance 

development. The report will also lend insight into the development of appropriate tools to 

identify and measure resistance in field populations of target pests. 

Research for Computational Toxicology

EPA’s Computational Toxicology research program supports the Molecular-level 

Understanding of Life Processes activity, one of the Administration’s six FY 2005 Interagency 

Research and Development Priorities, by employing the use of genomic information and 

modern computational techniques to enable better management of chemicals that may be 

present in the environment. In FY 2005, EPA will invest additional resources in computational 

toxicology (CT) research – 4.0 FTE and $4,080,093. The FY 2005 CT investment will build 

upon the current program by accelerating the use of bioinformatics and other computational 

approaches and apply the program to address other high priority regulatory issues, including the 

assessment of important classes of environmental agents. In FY 2005, the Agency will begin to 

develop computational models that could be used to help prioritize anti-microbial agents and 

inerts for screening and testing requirements. 

Fellowships 

The STAR fellowship program is the only Federal fellowship program designed 

exclusively for students pursuing advanced degrees in the environmental sciences and 

engineering. In FY 2005, the Agency will invest additional resources to support STAR graduate 

fellowships. This additional investment will extend the purpose of developing high quality 

scientists across multiple disciplines, including the biological and physical sciences, 

mathematics, computer sciences, and engineering that will benefit EPA, the private sector, and 

the entire Nation. 

 In FY 2005, EPA will also invest additional resources to support Association of Schools 

of Public Health (ASPH) fellowships. This investment will further extend the important 

contribution to public health issues that ASPH fellows provide within EPA, thereby helping EPA 

to better design its programs for human health outcomes. Under a cooperative agreement with 

the ASPH, eligible fellows are placed in EPA labs, centers, and offices to conduct projects that 

contribute to EPA’s public health mission. 

Research for Homeland Security

EPA's Homeland Security research program will continue to conduct critical cross-cutting 

research to provide near-term, appropriate, affordable, reliable, tested, and effective 

technologies and guidance. Work will focus on preparedness, risk assessment, detection, 

containment, decontamination, and disposal of chemical and biological agents used in attacks 

on water systems. New work will be initiated in the decontamination and clean up of biological 

agents. 

EXTERNAL FACTORS

The ability of the Agency to achieve its strategic goals and objectives depends on 

several factors over which the Agency has only partial control or influence. Partnerships, 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-20 

voluntary cooperation, international collaboration, industry, economic influences, industrial 

accidents, natural disasters, litigation, and legislation play critical roles, affecting the Agency’s 

results. Changes in the focus, level of effort, or status of any of these components could affect 

the success of the Agency’s programs under Goal 4. Consequently, EPA must consider these 

factors as it establishes annual performance measures and targets. 

 EPA assures the safe use of pesticides in coordination with the USDA and FDA, who 

have responsibility to monitor and control residues and other environmental exposures. EPA 

also works with these agencies to coordinate with other countries and international 

organizations with which the United States shares environmental goals. The Agency employs a 

number of mechanisms and programs to assure that our partners in environmental protection 

will have the capacity to conduct the activities needed to achieve the objectives. However, as 

noted, EPA often has limited control over these entities. Much of the success of EPA programs 

depends on the voluntary cooperation of the private sector and the public. 

 Other factors that may delay or prevent the Agency’s achievement of the objectives 

include lawsuits that delay or stop the planned activities of EPA and/or State partners, new or 

amended legislation, and new commitments within the Administration. Economic growth and 

changes in producer and consumer behavior could also have an influence on the Agency’s 

ability to achieve the objectives within the time frame specified. 

 Large-scale accidental releases, such as pesticide spills, or rare catastrophic natural 

events (such as hurricanes or large-scale flooding) could impact EPA’s ability to achieve 

objectives in the short term. In the longer term, new technology, newly identified environmental 

problems and priorities, or unanticipated complexity or magnitude of pesticide-related problems 

may affect the time frame for achieving the objectives or long-term goals. For example, 

pesticide use is affected by unanticipated outbreaks of pest infestations and/or disease factors, 

which require EPA to review emergency uses in order to preclude unreasonable risks to the 

environment. While the Agency can provide incentives for the submission of registration actions 

such as reduced risk and minor uses, EPA does not control incoming requests for registration 

actions. As a result, the Agency’s projection of regulatory workload is subject to change. 

 Progress in reducing risks is often highly dependent on industry’s response to EPA 

assistance and initiatives. EPA has little direct control over the pace and volume at which 

industry develops new chemicals or pesticides; we primarily concentrate on providing industry 

with tools, such as the PBT Profiler and Pollution Prevention Framework, or incentives, such as 

the priority review of reduced-risk pesticides, to help screen out high-risk chemicals before they 

are submitted for EPA review. These tools and incentives have been shown to be effective in 

gaining cooperation from industry and meeting our long-term and annual goals. In addition, 

voluntary programs, such as the HPV Challenge Program, operate exclusively on the basis of 

industry commitments for participation. Industry’s response to such initiatives affects the 

Agency’s ability to achieve effective new chemical screening efficiently. 

Research 

 Strong science is predicated on the desire of the Agency to make human health and 

environmental decisions based on high-quality scientific data and information. This challenges 

the Agency to perform and apply the best available science and technical analyses when 
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 

4-21 

addressing health and environmental problems. Such a challenge moves the Agency to a more 

integrated, efficient, and effective approach of reducing potential risks. As long as high quality 

science is a central tenant for actions taken by the Agency, then external factors will have a 

minimal impact on the goal. 

EFFICIENCY MEASURES

 In addition to the newly established efficiency measures, the Office of Pesticide 

Programs is creating a measures workplan to identify and plan for the development of riskbased outcome measures and indicators for both human health and the environment. The data 

and information for meaningful pesticides measures require coordination and cooperation with 

other organizations. The workplan will identify these partnerships and lay out the necessary 

steps for developing outcome measures and indicators for program goals. 

Goal 5: Compliance and 

Environmental 

Stewardship 
This page intentionally left blank 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-1 

Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

Strategic Goal: Improve environmental performance through compliance with 

environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and promoting environmental stewardship. 

Protect human health and the environment by encouraging innovation and providing incentives 

for governments, businesses, and the public that promote environmental stewardship. 

Resource Summary 

($ in 000)

 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget 

FY2005 

President’s 

Request Difference

1 - Improve Compliance $418,998 $431,695 $12,697 

2 - Improve Environmental 

 Performance through Pollution 

 Prevention and Innovation $137,969 $169,802 $31,833 

3 - Build Tribal Capacity $78,759 $78,931 $172 

4 - Enhance Science and Research $77,182 $70,129 ($7,053)

 Goal 5 Total $712,908 $750,557 $37,649 

 

Workyears 3,489 3,547 58 

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

The underlying principles of the activities within Goal 5 are to improve environmental 

performance through compliance with environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and 

promoting environmental stewardship. Working in partnership with State and Tribal 

governments, local communities and other Federal agencies, EPA identifies and addresses 

significant environmental and public health problems, strategically deploys its resources, and 

makes use of integrated approaches to achieve strong environmental outcomes. 

Enforcement and Compliance 

The Agency is committed to implementing a “smart enforcement” approach to EPA’s 

mission of identifying, preventing, and reducing potential environmental risks and 

noncompliance and promoting greater voluntary environmental stewardship. This approach 

uses the most appropriate enforcement or compliance tool to address the most significant 

problems to achieve the best outcomes. 

9.7% of Budget
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-2

 Smart enforcement embodies an integrated, common-sense approach to problemsolving and decision-making. Simply put, smart enforcement is the use of an appropriate mix of 

data collection and analysis; compliance monitoring, assistance and incentives; civil and 

criminal enforcement resources; and innovative problem-solving approaches; to address 

significant environmental issues and achieve environmentally beneficial outcomes. This 

approach requires that the Agency develop and maintain strong and flexible partnerships with 

regulated entities and a well-informed public, in order to foster a climate of empowerment, and a 

shared responsibility for the quality of our nation’s land, resources and communities.

Pollution Prevention and Innovation 

While enforcement presents one tool for achieving the Agency’s mission, the diversity of 

America’s environments (communities, homes, workplaces and ecosystems) requires EPA to 

adopt a multi-faceted approach to protecting the public from threats that may be posed by 

pesticides, toxic chemicals and other pollutants. Throughout its history, EPA has taken the lead 

in developing and evaluating tools and technologies to monitor, prevent, control, and cleanup 

pollution. The emphasis of the Agency’s programs in the 1970’s and 1980’s was to identify 

viable options for controlling or remediating environmental problems. Over the last decade, the 

Agency has turned its attention more and more to pollution prevention (P2) when addressing 

many important human health and environmental problems. A preventive approach requires that 

the Agency develop: (1) innovative design and production techniques that minimize or eliminate 

environmental liabilities; (2) holistic approaches to utilizing air, water, and land resources; and 

(3) fundamental changes in the creation of goods and services and their delivery to consumers. 

EPA remains committed to helping industry further prevent pollution by adopting more efficient, 

sustainable, and protective business practices, materials, and technologies. 

The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 establishes pollution prevention as a “national 

objective” and the pollution prevention hierarchy as national policy. The Act requires that 

pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source wherever feasible; that pollution that 

cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe manner; and that, in the 

absence of feasible prevention or recycling opportunities, pollution should be treated. Disposal 

or other release into the environment should be used as a last resort. Pollution Prevention is 

generally more effective than end-of-pipe approaches in reducing potential health and 

environmental risks in that it helps identify voluntary programs which: 

 Reduce releases to the environment; 

 Reduce the need to manage pollutants; 

 Avoid shifting pollutants from one medium (air, water, land) to another; and 

 Protect and conserve energy sources and natural resources for future generations by 

cutting waste and conserving materials. 

Increasingly complex environmental problems, such as the continuing accumulation of 

greenhouse gases; poor water quality; increasing urban smog; and inequities in building and 

maintaining water infrastructure; give rise to the need for EPA to develop and use a broader set 

of cross media tools. Shrinking state and Federal budgets also require the development of new 

ways to leverage partnerships with states, local communities and businesses to produce better 

environmental results at lower costs. EPA will work to ensure that governments, businesses and 

the public meet Federal legal environmental requirements, and will encourage and assist them 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-3 

to adopt environmental stewardship and to voluntarily exceed current requirements. Through 

public recognition, incentives, and sometimes relief from regulatory mandates, EPA will 

encourage environmental stewardship, behavior that goes beyond compliance with the laws. 

EPA is committed to promoting innovation in 

strategies to protect the environment, including new lesspolluting technologies. In FY 2002, EPA launched a 

comprehensive Innovations Strategy to drive innovation in all 

aspects of the Agency’s work. Crafted with input from states 

and other stakeholders, the Strategy focuses on 

transforming EPA into a more innovative, results-oriented 

organization by: 

 strengthening partnerships with states and Tribes; 

 focusing on a set of priority problems that are in need of innovative solutions; 

 developing tools and approaches that expand problem-solving capabilities; and, 

 fostering an innovation-friendly culture and set of organizational systems. 

 The effectiveness of EPA’s regulatory decisions depends on the analysis underlying 

these regulations, and the clarity with which they are presented. Their quality determines how 

well environmental programs actually work, and the extent to which they achieve health and 

environmental goals. Sound economic and policy analysis builds the foundation for EPA to meet 

its overarching goals, as well as to wisely use societal resources. 

EPA’s emphasis on economic and policy analysis supports the Agency’s continuing effort to 

quantify the benefits of its air, land and water regulations, policies and programs. For example, 

determining the value of ecological systems and the benefits associated with preserving these 

systems will be critical over the coming years as the Agency strives to focus on healthy 

communities and ecosystems. Sound economic and policy analysis also supports EPA’s 

stewardship and improved compliance goals by fostering consideration of alternative 

approaches, such as voluntary programs, innovative compliance tools, and flexible, marketbased solutions. Sound economic and policy analysis helps EPA achieve results by 

documenting and communicating its decisions, thereby avoiding challenges to our analyses that 

might otherwise impede our ability to implement regulations, policies or programs. 

Tribal Capacity 

Since adoption of the EPA Indian Policy in 1984, EPA has worked with Tribes on a 

government-to-government basis that affirms the federal trust responsibility that EPA maintains 

with federally recognized Tribe and Tribal government. In terms of strengthening partnerships 

with Tribes, under Federal environmental statutes, the Agency has responsibility for assuring 

human health and environmental protection in Indian Country. EPA has worked to establish the 

internal infrastructure and organize its activities in order to meet this responsibility. The creation 

of EPA’s American Indian Environmental Office (AIEO) in 1994 took responsibility for such 

efforts and was a further step in ensuring environmental protection in Indian Country. 

Research 

Today’s environmental innovations extend beyond scientific and technological advances 

to include new policies and management tools that respond to changing conditions and needs. 

Strengthening environmental 

partnerships, targeting priorities, 

expanding the current collection 

of tools, and creating a more 

innovative culture to effectively 

address challenging problems is 

what EPA’s innovation strategy is 

all about. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-4

Examples include market-based incentives that provide an economic benefit for environmental 

improvement; regulatory flexibility that gives companies more discretion related to how specific 

goals are met; and disclosure of information about environmental performance. As a result of 

these and other innovations, the nation’s environmental protection system continues to evolve, 

with a focus on increased efficiency and effectiveness, and greater inclusiveness of all elements 

of society. 

MEANS AND STRATEGY

Improving Compliance 

A strong enforcement and compliance program identifies and reduces noncompliance 

problems; assists the regulated community in understanding environmental laws and 

regulations; responds to complaints from the public; strives to secure a level economic playing 

field for law-abiding companies; and deters future violations. The Agency carefully targets its 

enforcement and compliance assurance resources, personnel and activities to address the most 

significant risks to human health and the environment, and to ensure that certain populations do 

not bear a disproportionate environmental burden. 

In FY 2005 the Agency will identify national priorities, in consultation with states and 

other regulatory partners, to most effectively and efficiently address significant environmental, 

public health, or noncompliance problems, and will use the most appropriate tool(s) to achieve 

the best outcomes culminating with the development and implementation of performance-based 

strategies for FY2005 - FY 2007 national priorities that take into account environmental justice 

considerations and a workforce deployment analysis. 

The EPA will also promote compliance in core program areas by working within the 

agency and with our partners to address major problems in media-specific programs with the 

most appropriate tool(s) to achieve the best outcomes. These efforts will be aided by use of a 

facility “Watch List” that identifies facilities with chronic noncompliance problems. EPA will use 

compliance data to identify problems in need of EPA or state attention, to monitor performance 

of Regional and media-specific program elements, and to improve the effectiveness of the 

program by incorporating lessons learned into program operations. 

The Agency’s “smart enforcement” approach uses the most appropriate enforcement or 

compliance tools to address the most significant problems to achieve the best outcomes. This 

approach includes: 

 Compliance Assistance and Incentives: The Agency’s Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance Program uses compliance assistance tools to encourage compliance with 

regulatory requirements and reduce adverse public health and environmental problems. 

To achieve compliance, the regulated community must first understand its regulatory 

obligations, and then learn how to best comply with those obligations. EPA supports the 

regulated universe by assuring that requirements are clearly understood, and by helping 

industry identify cost-effective options to comply through the use of pollution prevention 

and innovative technologies. EPA also enables other assistance providers (e.g., states, 

universities) to provide compliance information to the regulated community. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-5 

 Compliance Monitoring: The Agency reviews and evaluates the activities of the 

regulated community to determine compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permit 

conditions and settlement agreements and to determine whether conditions presenting 

imminent and substantial endangerment exist. The majority of work- years devoted to 

compliance monitoring are provided by the regions to conduct investigations, on-site 

inspections and evaluations, and perform monitoring, sampling and emissions testing. 

Compliance monitoring activities are both environmental media- and sector-based. The 

traditional media-based inspections and evaluations 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 environmental goals included in the EPA Strategic Plan. 

 Enforcement: The Enforcement Program addresses violations of environmental laws, 

to ensure that violators come into compliance with these laws and regulations. The 

program achieves the Agency’s environmental goals through consistent, fair and 

focused enforcement of all environmental statutes. The overarching goal of the 

enforcement program is to protect human health and the environment, targeting its 

actions according to degree of health and environmental risk. Further, it aims to level the 

economic playing field by ensuring that violators do not realize an economic benefit from 

non-compliance, and seeks to deter future violations. 

 Auditing and Evaluation Tools: Maximum compliance requires the active efforts of the 

regulated community to police itself. EPA will continue to investigate options for 

encouraging self-directed audits and disclosures. It will also continue to measure and 

evaluate the effectiveness of Agency programs in improving compliance rates and 

provide information and compliance assistance to the regulated community. Further, the 

Agency will maintain its focus on developing innovative approaches, through better 

communication, fostering partnerships and cooperation, and the application of new 

technologies. 

 Partnering: State, Tribal and local governments bear much of the responsibility for 

ensuring compliance, and EPA works in partnership with them and other Federal 

agencies to promote environmental protection. EPA also develops and maintains 

productive partnerships with other nations, to ensure and enforce compliance with US 

environmental standards and regulations. 

 NEPA Federal Review: EPA fulfills its uniquely federal responsibilities under the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires that federal agencies prepare 

and submit Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), to identify potential environmental 

consequences of major proposed activities, and develop plans to mitigate or eliminate 

negative impacts. The Agency maximizes its use of NEPA review resources by targeting 

its efforts toward potentially high-impact projects, and by promoting cooperation, 

innovation, and working towards a more streamlined review process. 

 International: EPA will continue to cooperate with states and the international 

community to enforce and ensure compliance with cross-border environmental 

regulations, and to help build their capacity to design and implement effective 

environmental regulatory, enforcement and environmental impact assessment programs. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-6

Improving Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and 

Innovation 

 Preventing pollution through regulatory, voluntary, and partnership actions, that is, 

educating and changing the behavior of the public, is a sensible and effective approach to 

sustainable development while protecting our nation’s health. Two groups with significant 

potential to effect environmental change are industry and academia. The Agency has 

successfully implemented a number of pollution prevention (P2) programs with both of these 

groups. These programs address the market for products through the purchasing and supply 

chain, emphasize certain sectors for additional targeted technical assistance, provide support 

for State and Tribal infrastructure, and work to reduce the number and amount of toxic 

chemicals in use by finding alternative chemicals and alternative industry processes. 

 Environmentally Preferable Purchasing: Because of the enormous span of private 

and public sector activities which would benefit from a prevention-based approach, 

EPA’s P2 programs necessarily cover a wide variety of informational and capacity 

building activities. For example, the Agency works to improve the market for 

environmentally “greener” products though voluntary programs, the Environmentally 

Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program, and the Green Suppliers Network. EPP provides 

guidance and carries out a variety of initiatives and outreach activities for a wide 

constituency, including federal agencies. Under the EPP Program, EPA will help 

purchasers identify those products that generate the least pollution, consume fewest 

non-renewable natural resources, and constitute the least threat to human health and to 

wildlife. The Green Suppliers Network enables large manufacturers to actively engage 

all levels of their supply chain in the development of good business approaches to 

prevent pollution. 

 Pollution Prevention State Grants: The development and support of State 

infrastructure is essential for providing small and medium size businesses, government 

and schools with the opportunities to change and to test new technologies, processes 

and alternatives. A vital component of our strategy is the continuation of the Pollution 

Prevention State Grant Program. In FY 2005, EPA will provide $7 million to States and 

Tribes to support their efforts to provide industry with technical assistance, information 

sharing, and outreach. The grants also support promising, innovative ideas for 

preventing pollution. 

 Technical Assistance: Sector-based technical assistance is another method to 

accomplish our mission. The Resource Conservation Challenge is a major national effort 

to find flexible, yet more protective ways to conserve our valuable resources through 

pollution prevention, waste reduction and energy recovery activities that will improve 

public health and the environment. EPA is working to address environmental problems in 

the electronics, buildings, hospitals, paper production, and priority chemicals areas 

under this comprehensive approach. Similarly, in an effort to expand voluntary pollution 

prevention strategies to the healthcare sector, the Hospitals for a Healthy Environment 

(H2E) Program works with hospitals and health care facilities to eliminate mercury use 

and reduce hospital wastes. 

 Green Chemistry: EPA works to help industry further prevent pollution by adopting 

more efficient, sustainable and protective business practices, materials, and 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-7 

technologies. EPA’s Green Chemistry Program supports research and fosters 

development and implementation of innovative chemical technologies to prevent 

pollution in a scientifically sound, cost-effective manner. The Green Engineering 

Program works to incorporate “green” or environmentally conscious thinking and 

approaches in the daily work of engineers, especially of chemical and environmental 

engineers. Similarly, EPA’s Design for the Environment (DfE) Industry Partnership 

Program promotes integration of cleaner, cheaper, and smarter pollution prevention 

solutions into everyday business practices. 

 NEPA Federal Review: EPA fulfills its uniquely federal responsibilities under the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires that federal agencies prepare 

and submit Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), to identify potential environmental 

consequences of major proposed activities, and develop plans to mitigate or eliminate 

negative impacts. The Enforcement and Compliance Assistance Program maximizes its 

use of NEPA review resources by targeting its efforts toward potentially high-impact 

projects, and by promoting cooperation, innovation, and working towards a more 

streamlined review process. 

 Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC): This program focuses on recovering 

materials and energy, either by converting wastes into products and energy directly or as 

a result of process and product redesigns that produce these benefits. We will closely 

coordinate our RCC efforts with the Agency’s other pollution prevention activities, 

potentially revising our strategies or targets to focus on materials and energy recovery 

through recycling when source reduction is not a feasible solution. The Agency is also 

working with its partners to identify additional goals that will reflect our expanded effort, 

beginning in 2003, to increase recovery of materials and energy and reduce releases of 

priority chemicals in waste. We expect these new goals to be in place by 2004, as the 

program becomes fully operational. 

 State Innovation Grant Program: EPA will develop and promote innovative 

environmental protection strategies that achieve better environmental results at a lower 

cost and also reward environmental stewardship. In collaboration with its state and Tribal 

partners, the Agency will continue to focus its efforts on innovations that will help small 

businesses and communities improve both their environmental performance and their 

bottom lines. A cornerstone of the Agency’s Innovation Strategy is reaching out to states 

and tribes through the State Innovation Grant Program to promote, support and facilitate 

innovation in state and Tribal environmental programs. The Grant Program allows states 

and tribes to test innovative ideas, such as using Environmental Management Systems 

in the permitting system to improve environmental results while achieving resource 

efficiencies. 

 Regulatory and Economic Management and Analysis: EPA is exploring the potential 

for more integrated, holistic, regulatory and non-regulatory approaches at a facility level, 

building on experience with federal and State pilot programs for permitting and pollution 

prevention. EPA sees facility-wide approaches as holding the possibility of obtaining 

better environmental results, while eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens. These 

approaches should help stimulate pollution prevention, and help facilities obtain the 

maximum benefit from use of environmental management systems. The Agency will 

augment programs such as EPA’s National Environment Performance Track Program, 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-8

which recognize and reward superior environmental performance and motivate 

improvements. Under its Sector Strategies Program, EPA will also tailor environmental 

performance improvement efforts to particular industry sectors. 

 Small Business: EPA has undertaken an effort to review the current Agency Small 

Business Strategy. The new Strategy will guide the Agency in future efforts to 

understand the operations and needs of small businesses, consider those needs when 

developing and implementing programs and policies that affect them, and work 

effectively with the small business community to improve environmental performance. 

Building Tribal Capacity 

 EPA’s strategy for Tribes has three major components. First, work with Tribes to create 

an environmental presence for each federally recognized Tribe. An environmental presence 

allows most Tribes to support at least one or two persons working in their community to build a 

strong, sustainable environment for the future. These people perform vital work by assessing 

the status of a Tribe’s environmental condition and building an environmental program tailored 

to that Tribe’s needs. 

 Another key role of this workforce is to alert EPA of serious conditions requiring attention 

in the near term so that, in addition to assisting in the building of Tribal environmental capacity, 

EPA can work with the Tribe to respond to immediate public health and ecological threats. 

Second, provide the information needed by the Tribe to meet EPA and Tribal environmental 

priorities. At the same time, ensure EPA has the ability to view and analyze the conditions on 

Indian lands and the effects of EPA and Tribal actions and programs on the environmental 

conditions. Third, provide the opportunity for implementation of Tribal environmental programs 

by Tribes, or directly by EPA, as necessary. 

Managing and Improving Environmental Data 

Through the Environmental Information Exchange Network (http://www.exchange

network.net), EPA will continue to provide funding to states, tribes, and territories to encourage 

and promote their data integration efforts and participation in the Network.1

 These grants will 

allow states and tribes to create “next generation” environmental data systems that integrate air, 

water, and waste data and provide the regulated community with efficient and reliable electronic 

means for reporting compliance information consistent with the President’s Management 

Agenda and the goals of e-Government. 

The National Environmental Information Exchange Network grant program encourages state 

and other partners’ data integration efforts and their participation in the Network. State, Tribal, 

and EPA data on the Network will both facilitate understanding of various environmental issues 

and serve as a precursor to understanding the data needed to fully comprehend environmental 

conditions and trends and, thus, make better-informed environmental and human health 

decisions. 

This program has four main parts: Network Readiness; Implementation; Collaboration; and 

Support Grants. These grants will increase state and Tribal capacity to integrate their 

environmental data, reduce reporting burden, enhance electronic reporting, provide public 

access to data, and participate in the Exchange Network. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-9 

Enhancing Science and Research 

EPA’s Compliance and Environmental Stewardship strategic goal is designed to protect 

human health and the environment by improving environmental behavior through regulatory and 

non-regulatory means. Under this goal, EPA strives to use science and research more 

strategically and effectively to inform Agency policy decisions and guide compliance, pollution 

prevention, and environmental stewardship efforts. In order to strengthen the scientific evidence 

and research supporting environmental policies and decisions, EPA works with its partners and 

stakeholders to identify research needs and set priorities. The Agency continues to conduct 

research on pollution prevention and new and developing technologies, with an overall aim of 

promoting conservation of energy and natural resources, pollution prevention, recycling, and 

other aspects of environmental stewardship. 

 EPA also conducts research to enhance its capacity to evaluate the economic costs and 

benefits and other social impacts of environmental policies. These efforts, undertaken in concert 

with other agencies, will result in improved methods to assess economic costs and benefits, 

such as improved economic assessments of land use policies and improved assessments for 

the valuation of children’s health, as well as other social impacts of environmental decisionmaking. 

 The Agency will also continue to characterize, prevent, and clean up contaminants 

associated with high priority human health and environmental problems through the 

development and verification of improved environmental tools and technologies. EPA will 

incorporate a holistic approach to pollution prevention by assessing the interaction of multiple 

stressors threatening both human and environmental health, and by developing cost-effective 

responses to those stressors. Research will also explore the principles governing sustainable 

systems and the integration of social, economic, and environmental objectives in environmental 

assessment and management. Emphasis will be on developing and assessing preventive 

approaches for industries and communities having difficulty meeting pollution standards. In a 

broader context, the pollution prevention research program will continue expanding beyond its 

traditional focus on the industrial sectors to other sectors (e.g., municipal) and ecosystems. The 

P2 research program will also focus on developing outcome goals to measure its performance. 

Several mechanisms are in place to ensure a high-quality research program at EPA. The 

EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), an independent chartered Federal Advisory Committee 

Act (FACA) committee, meets annually to conduct an in-depth review and analysis of EPA’s 

Science and Technology account. The SAB provides its findings to the House Science 

Committee and sends a written report on the finding to EPA’s Administrator after every annual 

review. In addition, EPA’s scientific and technical work products undergo either internal or 

external peer review, with major or significant products requiring external peer review. The 

Agency’s Peer Review Handbook (2nd Edition) codifies procedures and guidance for conducting 

peer review. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-10

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND FY 2005 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE GOALS

Improve Compliance 

 By 2008, maximize compliance to protect human health and the environment 

through compliance assistance, compliance incentives, and enforcement by achieving a 

5 percent increase in the pounds of pollution reduced, treated, or eliminated,43 and 

achieving a 5 percent increase in the number of regulated entities making 

improvements in environmental management practices.

44 (Baseline to be determined 

for 2005.) 

Improve Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and Innovation 

By 2008, improve environmental protection and enhance natural resource conservation 

on the part of government, business, and the public through the adoption of pollution prevention 

and sustainable practices that include the design of products and manufacturing processes that 

generate less pollution, the reduction of regulatory barriers, and the adoption of results-based, 

innovative, and multimedia approaches.

Build Tribal Capacity 

 Through 2008, assist all federally recognized Tribes in assessing the condition of 

their environment, help in building their capacity to implement environmental programs 

where needed to improve Tribal health and environments, and implement programs in 

Indian Country where needed to address environmental issues. 

Enhance Science and Research 

Through 2008, strengthen the scientific evidence and research supporting 

environmental policies and decisions on compliance, pollution prevention, and 

environmental stewardship. 

 

43“Pounds of pollutants reduced, treated, or eliminated” is an EPA measure of the quantity of pollutants 

that will no longer be released to the environment as a result of a non-complying facility returning to its 

allowable limits through the successful completion of an enforcement settlement. (Facilities may further 

reduce pollutants by carrying out voluntary Supplemental Environmental Projects.) On-line compliance 

information is available to the public via ECHO, at http://www.epa.gov/echo/. 44“Environmental management practices” refers to a specific set of activities EPA tracks to evaluate 

changes brought about through assistance, incentives, and concluded enforcement actions. 

Implementing or improving environmental management practices—for example, by changing industrial 

processes; discharges; or testing, auditing, and reporting—may assist a regulated facility in remaining in 

compliance with environmental requirements. Further information on environmental management 

practices is available at www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/planning/caseconc.pdf. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-11 

Highlights

Improving Compliance 

 The Compliance Assistance Program strategically targets areas where regulated entities 

demonstrate an incomplete understanding of how they can best comply with regulatory 

requirements. The Agency’s support of industry and government sector internet-based 

Compliance Assistance Centers greatly expands the reach of EPA’s compliance assistance 

efforts. It provides educational tools and other assistance, such as workshops and on-site visits, 

to help increase understanding of regulatory obligations, improve environmental management 

practices and reduce pollution. 

 Other tools that are used include compliance incentives, voluntary programs, and 

innovative approaches designed to motivate better environmental compliance and performance 

by individuals, communities, businesses and industry sectors. The Agency promotes selfpolicing and improvement through incentives, such as EPA’s Audit, Small Business and Small 

Local Governments policies and the inclusion of environmental management systems in 

enforcement actions. 

The Agency will continue to work with states and tribes to target areas that pose risks to 

human health or the environment, display patterns of noncompliance, or include 

disproportionately exposed populations. Media-specific, industry sector and problem-based 

priorities will be established for the national program, and will be developed in conjunction with 

the Regional offices, with input from states, tribes, environmental justice representatives, and 

other stakeholders. 

The Agency’s Forensics Support Program provides technical support, including field 

sampling and measurement; forensic analytical chemistry; and computer forensic imaging, 

restoration and analysis. The forensics team consistently provides high-quality data and 

analyses, allowing the Agency to successfully investigate and prosecute the nation’s most 

complex criminal and civil enforcement cases. 

Improving Environmental Performance through Pollution Prevention and 

Innovation 

In the 1990’s, through the Pollution Prevention Act, Congress formally established a 

national policy to prevent or reduce pollution at its source whenever feasible. The Act defines 

P2 as “...the use of materials, processes, or practices that reduce the use of hazardous 

materials, energy, water, or other resources and practices that protect natural resources through 

conservation or more efficient use.” 45

Major provisions of the Act include: 

 Providing matching funds for State and local P2 programs through the PPIS grant 

program to promote P2 techniques by businesses 

 Establishing a P2 strategy outlining the Agency’s intent to promote source reduction and 

collect data on source reduction 

 

45 Pollution Prevention Act. U.S. Code Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, Chapter 133, sec. 13101 b. Policy. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-12

 Operating a source reduction clearinghouse 

 Mandating P2 reporting as part of TRI 

There are also several Executive Orders that address Pollution Prevention. For 

example, Executive Order 13101, titled Greening the Government through Waste Prevention, 

Recycling, and Federal Acquisition, strengthens federal mandates to protect the environment 

and promote economic growth through the purchase of environmentally preferable products.46

Using the purchasing power of the federal government is one way to help improve the market 

for environmentally preferable, recycled content, and bio-based products while protecting our 

natural resources and providing an example for private industry. 

 The Executive Order (EO) defines “environmentally preferable” as “products or services 

that have a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared with 

competing products and services that serve the same purpose.” The EO also states that 

products or services should be compared across the entire life cycle – from raw material 

acquisition to its final disposal at its end of life. EPA has several responsibilities under the EO, 

including developing guidance on environmentally preferable purchasing for federal agencies, 

and assisting federal agencies with conducting and documenting pilot projects. EPA has also 

developed tools to assist federal purchasers, including a database of environmental standards, 

case study of federal pilot projects, model contract language and other resources. 

 Reducing pollution at its source involves two types of changes in behavior: making the 

greener products available, and increasing the demand for them. The Environmentally 

Preferable Purchasing (EPP) Program works to harness the purchasing power of government to 

stimulate demand for “greener” products and services, thereby fostering manufacturing 

changes. In FY 2005, the P2 program will shift resources to state grants and other P2 programs, 

which have shown significant results. The P2 research program will be evaluated to improve its 

performance and contribution to the Agency’s P2 efforts. 

In FY 2005, the Agency also will continue to identify environmental performance 

standards by which products can be evaluated, and invest in the development of tools, such as 

life-cycle analysis tools that businesses and purchasers can use to evaluate the environmental 

performance of products. In FY 2005, the Agency will continue to focus on providing tools, 

resources and models to federal agencies on a number of product categories, including 

electronics, janitorial services, and meetings/conferences. EPA will also continue its efforts to 

meet its own goals to green its own facilities and operations, including purchasing. 

 The voluntary Green Suppliers Network (GSN) builds on the premise that cost effective 

manufacturing, pollution prevention and environmental protection can be the result of good 

business planning and practice. The GSN uses the purchasing power of the private sector to 

achieve pollution prevention and manufacturing efficiencies throughout the supply chain. In FY 

2005 the GSN will continue to develop and enhance partnerships with the aerospace, 

healthcare/pharmaceutical, office/home furniture, farm and construction, and automotive 

sectors. The Agency expects to explore GSN with other federal agencies, replication of the 

 

46 Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition - 63 Federal Register

49643. September 16, 1998. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-13 

program internationally, and working with new sectors, such as the truck/bus and appliance 

manufacturing sectors. 

Through voluntary partnerships with academia, industry, and other government 

agencies, Green Chemistry supports fundamental research in environmentally benign chemistry 

and provides a variety of educational and international activities, including sponsoring 

conferences and meetings and developing tools. The Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge 

Award Program recognizes superior achievement in the design of chemical products, and 

continues to quantitatively demonstrate the scientific, economic, and environmental benefits that 

green chemistry technologies offer.47 In FY 2005, the program will explore ways to increase the 

number and effectiveness of incentives, and to reduce the barriers to mainstreaming green 

chemistry practices. 

Traditionally, engineering approaches to pollution prevention have been focused on 

waste minimization and have not addressed such risk factors as exposure, fate, and toxicity. 

EPA’s Green Engineering Program promotes consideration of these factors in the design, 

commercialization, and use of chemical products and the development of feasible, economical 

processes that minimize generation of pollution at the source. In FY 2005, the program will 

focus on the implementation of specific activities that provide quantifiable environmental 

benefits, particularly in industrial applications. The program will continue to partner with 

research institutions on their green engineering/sustainable research projects and collect data 

on the application of Green Engineering approaches and tools, with an emphasis on gathering 

information from people and organizations that have already received green engineering 

training and have adopted green engineering approaches. 

The Design for the Environment Program will continue to work with industry sectors to 

reduce risks to human health and the environment, improve performance, and save costs 

associated with existing and alternative pollution prevention technologies or processes. In FY 

2005, the program expects to initiate one to three new projects. The program will also 

implement, as part of any new partnership building activities, evaluation guidelines for 

developing and collecting measures, building on program-wide analysis and evaluation that will 

be completed in FY 2004. 

Pollution Prevention State Grants provide funds to build pollution prevention strategies 

into State government environmental protection programs, encourage innovative and nonregulatory pollution prevention solutions and encourage government/industry partnerships. 

Pollution Prevention State Grants are unique within EPA because they address cross-media 

and multi-media environmental impacts at the source, rather than end-of-pipe. 

 The Agency’s innovation programs are demonstrating significant results. For example, 

in FY 2003, The Performance Track Program added 61 new members, bringing the total 

number of members to 320. The Program’s first progress report showed that in FY 2001 

Performance Track facilities reduced energy use by 1.1 million MMBTUs, reduced hazardous 

materials use by 908 tons, and increased their use of recycled and reused materials by 10,823 

tons. (www.epa.gov/sectors/)

 

47 U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Green Chemistry Challenge. Accessed October 1, 2003. 

Available at http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/index.html. 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-14

 EPA expanded its partnerships with industry sectors in FY 2003. Eight new sectors 

(agribusiness, cement manufacturing, colleges and universities, construction, forest products, 

iron and steel manufacturing, paint and coatings, and ports) committed to work collaboratively 

to improve environmental management while also addressing regulatory and other barriers to 

improve performance and increase efficiencies. (www.epa.gov/sectors/) 

 

 Past performance demonstrates remarkable progress in delivering results. For example, 

in FY 2003, EPA assisted more than ten states in continuing support of twenty-one innovative 

projects approved in previous years and in approving eight new innovative projects. These 

projects achieved a broad range of efficiency gains by: enhancing the infrastructure to recycle 

electronic waste, streamlining permitting, better coordinating non-point and point sources to 

meet Total Maximum Daily Loads, supporting streamlined state authorization procedures, and 

improving compliance monitoring for small drinking water systems. These projects’ also 

invested in less energy demanding alternative technology at pulp and paper facilities, alternative 

landfill technology to increase landfill capacity, and increased recycling of hazardous wastes. 

 During the same year, EPA also awarded grants to three states to test innovative 

concepts in permitting. First, the funding provided under the State Innovation Grant Program 

allowed the State of Arizona to develop a web-based, Aintelligent@ screening and permit 

application program for storm water permits that will increase the efficiency of the permitting 

process. Second, Delaware will develop an auto body sector Environmental Results Program 

(ERP) modeled after other state ERP projects, such as Rhode Island and Florida. The Delaware 

ERP project expects to significantly improve environmental compliance in hundreds of small 

businesses state-wide. Third, Massachusetts will develop a watershed-based permitting 

program to improve water quality on a National Heritage Waterway. 

 The Environmental Results Program model that originated in Massachusetts has 

expanded to seven other states and the District of Columbia with projects being implemented 

across seven business sectors: dry cleaners, printers, photoprocessors, auto repair facilities, 

auto salvage yards, auto body shops, gasoline stations (underground storage tanks and Stage II 

vapor recovery systems). 

Research 

 In FY 2005, the Agency will continue its systems-based approach to pollution 

prevention, which will lead to a more thorough assessment of human health and environmental 

risks and a more comprehensive management of those risks. EPA will improve FY 2005 

performance measures to prevent pollution at its source and continue to evaluate a small set of 

environmental technologies through the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program. 

ETV is a voluntary, market-based verification program for commercial-ready technologies. In 

FY 2005, the ETV program will complete 15 additional verifications and two testing protocols. In 

addition, the program will evaluate whether verifications and testing protocols have led to 

increased use of environmental technologies. 

Additionally, through the National Environmental Technology Competition (NETC), 

based on results from field demonstrations of one-year in duration, EPA will recognize 

innovative technologies that cost-effectively remove arsenic from drinking water to help small 

communities meet the new arsenic drinking water standard. Other work includes research on 
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-15 

market mechanisms and incentives that will support investigations that explore the conditions 

under which financial and other performance incentives will achieve environmental objectives at 

a lower cost or more effectively than traditional regulatory approaches. 

EXTERNAL FACTORS

 The Agency’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program’s ability to meet its 

annual performance goals may be affected by a number of factors. Projected performance 

could be impacted by natural catastrophes, such as major floods or significant chemical spills, 

requiring a redirection of resources to address immediate environmental threats. Many of the 

targets are coordinated with and predicated on the assumption that state and Tribal partners will 

continue or increase their levels of enforcement and compliance work. In addition, successful 

conclusion of EPA’s enforcement relies on the Department of Justice to accept and prosecute 

cases. The success of EPA’s activities hinges on the availability and applicability of technology 

and adequate resources to modernize and maintain our information systems. Finally, the 

regulated community's willingness to comply with the law will greatly influence EPA's ability to 

meet its performance goals. 

 Other factors, such as the number of projects subject to scoping requirements initiated 

by other federal agencies, the number of draft/final documents (Environmental Assessments 

and Environmental Impact Statements) submitted to EPA for review, streamlining requirements 

of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), and the responsiveness of other 

federal agencies to environmental concerns raised by EPA, may also impact the Agency’s 

ability to meet its performance goals. The NEPA Compliance workload is driven by the number 

of project proposals submitted to EPA for funding or NPDES permits that require NEPA 

compliance, including the Congressional projects for wastewater, water supply and solid waste 

collection facility grants which have increased in recent years. 

In the area of pollution prevention, the Agency’s work is almost entirely dependent on 

voluntary partnerships, collaboration, and persuasion, since there are few environmental 

regulations that set specific source-reduction requirements. The Design for the Environment 

Program seeks partnerships with industry trade associations to engage jointly in the 

development and marketing of products that generate less pollution. The Green Chemistry 

Program challenges industry and the academic community to step forward with new chemical 

formulations that pose fewer risks to human health and the environment. EPA’s strategy of 

“greening the supply chain” depends on the willingness of large manufacturers to voluntarily 

require their suppliers to provide environmentally preferable products. These efforts all depend 

on our partners’ continued willingness to cooperate in joint endeavors that may not realize an 

immediate payoff. EPA’s ability to carry out its voluntary pollution prevention initiatives could be 

reduced if partners begin to believe that the initiatives are not worthwhile, are too risky, or are 

otherwise contrary to their best interests. Historically however, this has not been the case, and 

the Agency and industry have worked well together to reduce pollution. 

 Finally, our evolving user community will also affect the success of our information 

efforts. As more states and Tribes develop the ability to integrate their environmental 

information, we must adjust EPA’s systems to ensure that we are able to receive and process 

reports from states and industry under Agency statutory requirements. Local citizens’ 

organizations and the public at large are also increasingly involved in environmental decision-
Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 

5-16

making, and their need for information and more sophisticated analytical tools is growing. 

Further, shrinking state budgets have underscored the critical need for the State Innovations 

Grants Program. 

EPA’s policy has been, and continues to be, that Tribes develop the capability to 

implement federal programs themselves. However, in working with Tribes, EPA has realized 

that “Treatment as a State” (TAS) may not suit the needs of all Tribes. Some Tribes with acute 

pollution sources and other environmental problems may be too small to support fully delegated 

or approved environmental programs. Other Tribes are wary of seeking TAS status because it 

may lead to costly litigation that may in turn lead to a diminishment of Tribal sovereignty. In the 

absence of EPA-approved Tribal programs, EPA generally faces practical challenges in 

implementing the federal programs in Indian Country. EPA will continue to encourage and work 

with Tribes to develop their capability to implement Federal environmental programs. 

Achieving our objectives for Indian Country is based upon a partnership with Indian 

Tribal governments, many of which face severe poverty, employment, housing and education 

issues. Because Tribal Leader and Environmental Director support will be critical in achieving 

this objective, the Agency is working with Tribes to ensure that they understand the importance 

of having good information on environmental conditions in Indian Country and sound 

environmental capabilities. In addition, EPA also works with other Federal Agencies, the 

Department of Interior (US Geological Survey, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Bureau of 

Reclamation), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Indian Health Service 

and the Corps of Engineers to help build programs on Tribal lands. Changing priorities in these 

agencies could impact their ability to work with EPA in establishing and implementing strategies, 

regulations, guidance, programs and projects that affect Tribes. 

 Strong science is predicated on the desire of the Agency to make human health and 

environmental decisions based on high-quality scientific data and information. This challenges 

the Agency to perform and apply the best available science and technical analyses when 

addressing health and environmental problems that adversely impact the United States. Such a 

challenge moves the Agency to a more integrated, efficient, and effective approach of reducing 

risks. As long as high quality science is a central tenant for actions taken by the Agency, then 

external factors will have a minimal impact on the goal. 
Appendixes 

Appendix A: Categorical Grants

A-1 

CATEGORICAL GRANTS PROGRAM (STAG)

(Dollars in millions)

In FY 2005, the President’s Budget requests a total of $1,252 million for 25 “categorical” 

program grants for state and Tribal governments. This is an increase of $49.6 million over FY 

2004. 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. 

 In FY 2005, 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. 

$665 $645 $674

$745

$880 $885

$1,006

$1,074

$1,158 $1,202

$1,252

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Appendix A: Categorical Grants

A-2

HIGHLIGHTS:

State & Local Air Quality Management, Radon, and Tribal Air Quality Management 

Grants

In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $247.8 million for Air State and Local 

Assistance grants to support state, local, and Tribal air programs as well as radon programs. 

State and Local Air Quality Management grant funding is requested in the amount of $228.6 

million. These funds provide resources to state and local air pollution control agencies for the 

development and implementation of programs for the prevention and control of air pollution or 

for the implementation of national primary and secondary ambient air standards. They can also 

be used to support certain research and development and related activities. Tribal Air Quality 

Management grants, requested in the amount of $11.1 million, provide funds to Tribes to 

develop and implement air pollution prevention and control programs, or to implement national 

primary and secondary ambient air standards. Lastly, the President’s Budget includes $8.2 

million for Radon grants, to provide funding for state radon programs.

Pesticide Enforcement, Toxics Substance Compliance, and Sector Program 

Grants 

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $27.3 million to build environmental 

partnerships with states and tribes and to strengthen their ability to address environmental and 

public health threats. The enforcement state grants request consists of $19.9 million for 

Pesticides Enforcement, $5.15 million for Toxic Substances Enforcement Grants, and $2.25 

million for Sector 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. Under the Toxic Substances 

Compliance Grant program, states receive funding for compliance inspections of asbestos and 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and for implementation of the state lead abatement 

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. 

Pesticides Program Implementation Grants 

 The President’s FY 2005 budget includes $13.1 million for Pesticides Program 

Implementation grants. These resources will assist states and tribes in implementing the safer 

use of pesticides, including: worker protection; certification and training of pesticide applicators; 

protection of endangered species; tribal pesticide programs; integrated pest management and 

environmental stewardship; and protection of water from pesticide contamination. 
Appendix A: Categorical Grants

A-3 

Lead Grants

 The President’s FY 2005 budget includes $13.7 million for Lead grants. This funding will 

support the development of authorized programs in both States and Tribes to prevent lead 

poisoning through the training of workers who remove lead-based paint, the accreditation of 

training programs, the certification of contractors, and renovation education programs. 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. 

Pollution Prevention Grants 

 The FY 2005 request includes $6.0 million for Pollution Prevention grants. The grant 

program provides technical assistance towards the achievement of reduced pollution through 

source reduction. 

Environmental Information Grants 

In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $25.0 million to continue a grant program, 

started in 2002, which provides states and tribes assistance to develop the Exchange Network. 

This grant program will support state and Tribal efforts to complete necessary changes to their 

information management systems to facilitate participation, and enhance state information 

integration efforts. The Exchange Network will improve environmental decision making, 

improve data quality and accuracy, ensure security of sensitive data, and reduce the burden on 

those who provide and those who access information 

Underground Storage Tanks (UST) Grants 

 The President’s FY 2005 budget includes $37.9 million for Underground Storage Tank 

grants, an increase of $26 million over 2004. The proposed $26 million increase in state and 

tribal grants would allow EPA to fund additional inspections of underground storage tanks. 

More inspections will ensure proper operation and maintenance of UST systems to prevent 

future releases. This investment more than triples the size of Federal assistance to states and 

tribes for the UST program. States and tribes will use these resources to ensure that UST 

owners and operators routinely and correctly monitor all regulated tanks and piping in 

accordance with regulations, and also to develop programs with sufficient authority and 

enforcement capabilities to operate in lieu of the Federal program. 

Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance Grants

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $106.4 million in funding for Hazardous 

Waste Financial Assistance grants. Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance grants are used for 

the implementation of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous 

waste management and minimization programs. 

Brownfields Grants 

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $60.0 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. 
Appendix A: Categorical Grants

A-4

Water Pollution Control (Clean Water Act Section 106) Grants 

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $222.4 million for Water Pollution Control 

grants, an increase of $22.0 million over 2004. Of this increase, $17.0 million will fund grants to 

states and tribes under the water quality monitoring initiative to support adoption of new 

comprehensive monitoring strategies and the development of statistically valid monitoring 

networks to help target activities and determine water quality status and trends. The remaining 

$5 million will assist states in the implementation of the Concentrated Animal Feeding 

Operations (CAFOs) programs and support issuance of storm sewer permits. 

Wetlands Grants 

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $20.0 million for Wetlands Program Grants. 

These grant resources will be used to assist states and tribes in protecting wetlands and waters 

not covered by the Clean Water Act. 

Public Water System Supervision Grants 

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $105.1 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. 

Indian General Assistance Program Grants 

In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $62.5 million for the Indian General 

Assistance Program (GAP) to help Federally recognized tribes and inter-tribal consortia 

develop, implement and assume environmental programs. 

Homeland Security Grants 

 In FY 2005, the President’s Budget includes $5.0 million for homeland security grants to 

support states’ efforts to work with drinking water and wastewater systems to develop and 

enhance emergency operations plans; conduct training in the implementation of remedial plans 

in small systems; and, develop detection, monitoring and treatment technology to enhance 

drinking water and wastewater security. 

Water Quality Cooperative Agreements Grants 

 The FY 2005 President’s Budget includes $20.5 million for Water Quality Cooperative 

Agreements grants, an increase of $1.5 million over 2004. This increase will fund a new 

technical assistance and demonstration grants program to show municipalities innovative ways 

of managing infrastructure. Through the Water Quality Cooperative Agreement program, the 

Agency continues to support the creation of unique and innovative approaches to address 

requirements of the NPDES program, with special emphasis on wet weather activities. In 

addition, this grant program has long supported other programmatic activities such as 

sustainable management systems for water pollution control and various other program 

innovations. 
Appendix A: Categorical Grants

A-5 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) Grants 

 The FY 2005 President’s Budget includes $11.0 million for the Underground Injection 

Control grants program. Ensuring safe underground injection of waste materials is a fundamental 

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. 

Targeted Watershed Grants 

 The President’s FY 2005 Budget funds Targeted Watershed grants at $25 million, an 

increase of $5 million over to help municipalities meet requirements for nutrient loading 

reductions. The program supports competitive grants to watershed stakeholders ready to 

undertake immediate action to improve water quality, and to improve watershed protection 

measures with tools, training and technical assistance. Special emphasis will be given to 

projects that promote water quality trading opportunities to more efficiently achieve water quality 

benefits through market-based approaches. Of these funds, $10 million will be set-aside for a 

new regional pilot program. For 2005, the pilot will take place in the Chesapeake Bay 

watershed, and will focus on helping publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs) reduce nutrient 

discharges to the Bay through nonpoint source projects.

State and Tribal Performance Fund 

The President’s FY 2005 Budget includes $23 million for a new performance grants 

program that will be available to states and tribes on a competitive basis for all activities eligible 

for categorical grant assistance. The award process will be performance-focused, with winners 

selected on the basis of environmental and/or public health outcomes. This will encourage 

development of projects with tangible, performance-based environmental and health outcomes 

that can be models for implementation across the nation.. 

Wastewater Operator Training Grants

 The President’s FY 2005 Budget includes $1.5 million as a transfer from EPM to STAG 

to better align its budget with its performance goals and reflect the environmental partnerships 

supported by these funds. States and state universities receive funding to provide technical 

assistance for municipally owned wastewater treatment plants. 

Elimination of Tribal Cap on Non-Point Sources 

In 2005, the President’s Budget 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. 

Tribes applying for and receiving Section 319 grants have steadily increased from two in 1991 

to over 70 in 2001. This proposal recognizes the increasing demand for resources to address 

Tribal nonpoint source program needs. 
Appendix A: Categorical Grants

A-6

CATEGORIAL PROGRAM GRANTS (STAG) 

by National Program and State Grant 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 Grant 

FY2004 

President's 

Budget 

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget Difference

Air & Radiation $0 

State and Local Assistance $228,550 $228,550 $0 

Tribal Assistance $11,050 $11,050 $0 

Radon $8,150 $8,150 $0 

$247,750 $247,750 $0

Water Quality 

Pollution Control (Section 106) $200,400 $222,400 $22,000

Beaches Protection $10,000 $10,000 $0 

Nonpoint Source (Section 319) $238,500 $209,100 ($29,400)

Wetlands Program Development $20,000 $20,000 $0 

Water Quality Cooperative Agrmts $19,000 $20,500 $1,500 

Targeted Watersheds $20,000 $25,000 $5,000 

Wastewater Operator Training Grants $0 $1,500 $1,500 

 $507,900 $508,500 $600 

Drinking Water 

Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) $105,100 $105,100 $0 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) $11,000 $11,000 $0 

Homeland Security $5,000 $5,000 $0 

$121,100 $121,100 $0

 

Hazardous Waste 

H.W. Financial Assistance $106,400 $106,400 $0 

Brownfields $60,000 $60,000 $0 

Underground Storage Tanks $11,950 $37,950 $26,000 

 $178,350 $204,350 $26,000 

Pesticides & Toxics 

Pesticides Program Implementation $13,100 $13,100 $0 

Lead $13,700 $13,700 $0 

Toxic Substances Compliance $5,150 $5,150 $0 

Pesticides Enforcement $19,900 $19,900 $0 

$51,850 $51,850 $0

Multimedia 

Environmental Information $25,000 $25,000 $0 

Pollution Prevention $6,000 $6,000 $0 

Sector Program $2,250 $2,250 $0 

Indian General Assistance Program $62,500 $62,500 $0

State and Tribal Performance Fund $0 $23,000 $23,000 

 $95,750 $118,750 $23,000 

 

 TOTALS $1,202,700 $1,252,300 $49,600 
Appendix B: Infrastructure Finance

B-1 

Infrastructure / STAG Projects Financing 

(Dollars in millions)

FY 2004 

President’s 

Budget

FY 2005 

President’s 

Budget

Infrastructure Financing 

Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) $850.0 $850.0

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund 

(DWSRF) $850.0 $850.0

STAG Projects 

Brownfields Environmental Projects $120.5 $120.5

Clean School Bus USA $0.0 $65.0

Mexico Border Projects $50.0 $50.0

Alaska Native Villages $40.0 $40.0

Targeted Projects - Puerto Rico $8.0 $4.0

Total $1,918.5 $1,979.5

Infrastructure and Special Projects Funds 

 The President’s Budget includes a total of $1,979.5 million in 2005 for EPA’s 

Infrastructure programs. Of the total infrastructure request, $1,744 million will support 

EPA’s Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water, $170.5 million will support EPA’s Goal 4: Healthy 

Communities and Ecosystems. 

 Infrastructure funding under the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) 

appropriation provides financial assistance to states, municipalities and Tribal 

governments to fund a variety of drinking water, wastewater, air and Brownfields 

environmental projects. These funds are essential to 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 
Appendix B: Infrastructure Finance

B-2

infrastructure construction. As set-asides of the SRF programs, grants are available to 

Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages for drinking water and wastewater 

infrastructure needs based on priority lists. The Brownfields Environmental Program 

provides states, tribes, political subdivisions (including cities, towns, and counties) the 

necessary tools, information, and strategies for promoting a unified approach to 

environmental assessment cleanup, characterization, and redevelopment at sites that 

are potentially or lightly contaminated with hazardous wastes and petroleum 

contaminants. 

 The resources included in this budget will enable the Agency, in conjunction with 

EPA’s state, local, and Tribal partners, to achieve several important goals for 2005. 

Some of these goals include: 

 94 percent of the population served by community water systems will receive 

drinking water meeting all health-based standards with compliance dates of 

December 2001 or earlier.

 Award 126 assessment grants under the Brownfields program, bringing the 

cumulative total grants awarded to 806 by the end of FY 2005 paving the way for 

productive reuse of these properties. This will bring the total number of sites 

assessed to 6,800 while leveraging a total of $7.5 billion in cleanup and 

redevelopment funds since 1995. 

GOAL 1: Clean Air and Global Climate Change

Clean School Bus USA Initiative 

The FY 2005 President’s Budget expands EPA's Clean School Bus USA 

program to $65 million in grant funding for projects that reduce diesel emissions from 

school buses through bus retrofit or replacement activities. Clean School Bus USA 

helps ensure that school buses – which are the safest way for kids to get to school – 

also are the cleanest possible transportation for this generation of school children. EPA 

initially launched the program in April 2003 using $5 million in grant funding. The initial 

grant offering garnered 120 grant applications from every region of the country totaling 

nearly $60 million in requests and offering some $36 million in matching resources. 

EPA supported 17 of these projects with the given resources. By expanding this 

program, additional resources are available to communities for localized solutions that 

address an issue important to children and parents across the nation.

GOAL 2: Clean and Safe Water

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 
Appendix B: Infrastructure Finance

B-3 

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 capitalize the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF). 

Through this program, the Federal government provides financial assistance for 

wastewater and other water projects, including nonpoint source, estuary, stormwater, 

and sewer overflow projects. Water infrastructure projects contribute to direct 

ecosystem improvements by lowering the amount of nutrients and toxic pollutants in all 

types of surface waters. 

 The President’s Budget includes funding the CWSRF at $850 million each year 

through 2011. More than $20 billion has already been provided to capitalize the 

CWSRF, over twice the original Clean Water Act authorized level of $8.4 billion. Total 

CWSRF funding available for loans since 1987, reflecting loan repayments, state match 

dollars, and other funding sources, is approximately $47 billion, of which more than 

$43.5 billion has been provided to communities as financial assistance. 

 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. Today, 99 percent of 

community wastewater treatment plants, serving 181 million people, use secondary 

treatment or better. 

 The DWSRF will be self-sustaining in the long run and will help offset the costs of 

ensuring safe drinking water supplies and assisting small communities in meeting their 

responsibilities. As noted in the May 2003 Report to Congress, since its inception in 

1997, the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program has made available 

$5.2 billion to finance 1,900 infrastructure improvement projects nationwide, with a 

return of $1.60 for every $1 of federal funds invested.

State Flexibility between SRFs: The Agency requests permanent continuation 

of authority provided in the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments 

which allows states to transfer an amount equal to 33 percent of their DWSRF 

grants to their CWSRF programs, or an equivalent amount from their CWSRF 

program to their DWSRF program. The transfer provision gives states flexibility 

to address the most critical demands in either program at a given time. The 

statutory transfer provision expired September 30, 2002. 

Set-Asides for Tribes: To improve public health and water quality in Indian 

Country, the Agency will continue the 1 1/2% set-aside of the CWSRF for 

wastewater grants to tribes as provided in the Agency’s 2002 appropriation. 

More than 70,000 homes in Indian country have inadequate or nonexistent 
Appendix B: Infrastructure Finance

B-4

wastewater treatment. EPA and the Indian Health Service estimate that Tribal 

wastewater infrastructure needs exceed $650.0 million. 

Alaska Native Villages 

 The President’s Budget includes $40.0 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, and local communities to provide 

needed financial and technical assistance. 

Puerto Rico 

 The President’s Budget includes $4 million for the design of upgrades to 

Metropolitano’s Sergio Cuevas treatment plant in San Juan, Puerto Rico. When all 

upgrades are complete, EPA estimates that about 1.4 million people will enjoy safer, 

cleaner drinking water. 

GOAL 4: Healthy Communities And Ecosystems

Brownfields Environmental Projects 

The President’s Budget includes a total of $120.5 million for brownfields 

environmental projects. EPA will award grants for assessment activities, cleanup, and 

Brownfields cleanup revolving loan funds (BCRLF). Additionally, this includes cleanup 

of sites contaminated by petroleum or petroleum products and environmental job 

training grants. 

Mexico Border 

 The President’s Budget includes a total of $50.0 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. The communities 

along both sides of the Border are facing unusual human health and environmental 

threats because of the lack of adequate wastewater and drinking water facilities. EPA’s 

U.S./Mexico Border program provides funds to support the planning, design and 

construction of high priority water and wastewater treatment projects along the 

U.S./Mexico Border. The Agency’s FY 2005 goal is to have a cumulative total of 1.5 

million people in the Mexico border area protected from health risks because of 

adequate water and wastewater sanitation systems funded. 
Appendix C: Trust Funds

C-1 

Trust Funds 

(Dollars in Millions) 

FY 2004 FY 2005 

President’s Budget President’s Budget

 $ FTE $ FTE 

Superfund 

 Response $1,005 1,514 $999 1,520

 Enforcement $176 1,121 $174 1,119

 Management & Support $140 488 $149 490

 Other Federal Agencies $11 0 $11 0

Transfers 

 Inspector General $13 94 $13 94

 Research & Development $45 130 $36 130

Superfund Total $1,390 3,347 $1,381 3,353

Base Realignment and 

Closure $0 84 $0 78

LUST $73 80 $73 80

Trust Funds Total: $1,463 3,511 $1,454 3,511

Superfund 

 In 2005, the President’s Budget requests a total of $1,381 million in discretionary 

budget authority and 3,353 workyears for Superfund. Currently, more than 93 percent 

of 1,518 sites on the Superfund final National Priorities List (NPL) are either undergoing 

cleanup construction (remedial or removal) or are completed. 

 Of the total funding requested, $999 million and 1,520 workyears are for Superfund 

cleanups. The Agency’s Superfund cleanup program addresses public health and 

environmental threats from uncontrolled releases of hazardous substances. Included in 

the FY 2005 budget is a $150 million increase specifically targeted for Superfund 

cleanups. This increase in funding will allow construction to begin at high priority sites 

and address the growing backlog of construction project resource needs. The Agency 

expects to demonstrate significant progress in reducing risk to human health and the 

environment and revitalizing the number of construction completions at sites on the NPL 

within two to three years. In 2005, EPA and its partners will complete 40 Superfund 
Appendix C: Trust Funds

C-2

cleanups at NPL sites to achieve the overall goal of 926 total construction completions 

by the end of 2005. 

 Of the total funding requested, $174 million and 1,119 workyears are for the 

Superfund Enforcement program. 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 program focuses on maximizing all aspects of Potentially 

Responsible Party (PRP) participation, including having PRPs initiate work at 70% of 

the new construction starts at non-Federal Facility Superfund sites, and emphasizing 

fairness in the settlement process. Where PRP negotiations and previous enforcement 

actions fail, EPA uses its appropriation to clean up sites and then seeks to recover 

these costs from the PRPs. 

 The remaining portion of the Superfund FY 2005 President’s Budget is comprised of 

Management and Support, other Federal agencies, Research and Development and the 

Inspector General. The President’s Budget requests $149 million and 490 workyears 

for management and support activities. These resources support Agency-wide 

resource management and control functions including: essential infrastructure, contract 

administration, financial accounting and other fiscal operations. 

 Included in the Superfund request is $11 million for Federal agency partners. The 

Agency works with several Federal agencies to perform essential services in areas 

where the Agency does not possess the specialized expertise. Contributors include the 

United States Coast Guard, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 

Department of the Interior, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 

 The President’s Budget also requests $49 million and 224 workyears to be 

transferred to Research and Development for innovative cleanup technology testing and 

to the Inspector General for program auditing. 

Base Realignment and Closure Act 

 The FY 2005 President’s Budget requests 78 reimbursable workyears to conduct the 

Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC) program. Since 1993, EPA has worked 

with the Department of Defense (DoD) and the states’ 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 1995, 497 

major military installations representing the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Defense 

Logistics Agency were slated for realignment or closure. Of these, 107 installations 

have been designated as Fast-Track sites. The Fast-Track program strives to make 

parcels available for reuse as quickly as possible, by either transfer of uncontaminated 

or remedial parcels, or lease of contaminated parcels where cleanup is underway or 

“early transfer” of contaminated property undergoing cleanup. 
Appendix C: Trust Funds

C-3 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

 The FY 2005 President’s Budget requests $73 million and 80 workyears for the 

Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program. Approximately 85 percent of this 

will be used for state cooperative agreements and support for tribal cleanup. One of the 

Agency’s highest priorities in the LUST program over the next several years is to 

address approximately 136,000 cleanups that have yet to be completed (as of 

September 2003), and to address LUST sites that are difficult to remediate because 

they are contaminated by methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) and other oxygenates. In 

2005 the Agency’s goal is to complete 21,000 cleanups under the supervision of EPA 

and its state, local and tribal partners. 

 Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-1 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Summary of Agency Resources by Appropriation 

($ in 000)

Appropriation 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget

Environmental Programs & Management $2,219,659 $2,316,958

Science & Technology $731,483 $689,185

Buildings and Facilities $42,918 $42,918

Oil Spill Response $16,209 $16,425

Inspector General $36,808 $37,997

Hazardous Substance Superfund $1,389,716 $1,381,416

 Superfund Program $1,331,805 $1,332,134

 Research Transfer $44,697 $36,144

 IG Transfer $13,214 $13,139

State and Tribal Assistance Grants $3,121,200 $3,231,800

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks $72,545 $72,545

 

less Offsetting Receipts -$4,000 -$30,000

Total Budget Authority $7,626,537 $7,759,244
Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-2

Environmental Protection Agency 

Summary of Agency Resources by Goal 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

Goal 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget 

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget Difference

1 - Clean Air and Global Climate Change $915,983 $1,004,616 $88,632

 

2 - Clean and Safe Water $2,959,732 $2,936,969 -$22,763

 

3 - Land Preservation and Restoration $1,779,473 $1,798,171 $18,697

 

4 - Healthy Communities and Ecosystems $1,262,441 $1,298,932 $36,491

 

5 - Compliance and Environmental Stewardship $712,908 $750,557 $37,649

 

 less Offsetting Receipts ($4,000) ($30,000) ($26,000)

 

 $7,626,537 $7,759,244 $132,707
 Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-3 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Summary of Agency Workforce by Goal 

(Workyears) 

 

Goal 

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget 

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget Difference

1 - Clean Air and Global Climate Change 2,738 2,757 19

 

2 - Clean and Safe Water 3,054 3,041 (12)

 

3 - Land Preservation and Restoration 4,745 4,708 (36)

 

4 - Healthy Communities and Ecosystems 3,824 3,850 26

 

5 - Compliance and Environmental Stewardship 3,489 3,547 58

 

 17,850 17,904 54

 Projected utilization for FY's 2004-2005 is 17,635 workyears in each year. 
Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-4

Resources by Program / Project 

(Dollars in Thousands)

Program / Project

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget 

Acquisition Management $41,846 $43,660 

Administrative Law $4,705 $4,929 

Alternative Dispute Resolution $1,153 $1,890 

Audits, Evaluations, and Investigations $50,021 $51,136 

Beach / Fish Programs $3,690 $3,238 

Brownfields $27,821 $28,002 

Categorical Grant: Beaches Protection $10,000 $10,000 

Categorical Grant: Brownfields $60,000 $60,000 

Categorical Grant: Environmental Information $25,000 $25,000 

Categorical Grant: Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance $106,400 $106,400 

Categorical Grant: Homeland Security $5,000 $5,000 

Categorical Grant: Lead $13,700 $13,700 

Categorical Grant: Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319) $238,500 $209,100 

Categorical Grant: Pesticides Enforcement $19,900 $19,900 

Categorical Grant: Pesticides Program Implementation $13,100 $13,100 

Categorical Grant: Pollution Control (Sec. 106) $200,400 $222,400 

Categorical Grant: Pollution Prevention $6,000 $6,000 

Categorical Grant: Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) $105,100 $105,100 

Categorical Grant: Radon $8,150 $8,150 

Categorical Grant: Targeted Watersheds $20,000 $25,000 

Categorical Grant: Toxics Substances Compliance $5,150 $5,150 

Categorical Grant: Tribal General Assistance Program $62,500 $62,500 

Categorical Grant: Underground Injection Control (UIC) $11,000 $11,000 

Categorical Grant: Underground Storage Tanks $11,950 $37,950 

Categorical Grant: Wastewater Operator Training $0 $1,500 

Categorical Grant: Water Quality Cooperative Agreements $19,000 $20,500 

Categorical Grant: Wetlands Program Development $20,000 $20,000 

Categorical Grant: Sector Program $2,250 $2,250 

Categorical Grant: State and Local Air Quality Management $228,550 $228,550 

Categorical Grant: State and Tribal Performance Fund $0 $23,000 

Categorical Grant:Tribal Air Quality Management $11,050 $11,050 

Central Planning, Budgeting, and Finance $86,143 $86,655 

Children and other Sensitive Populations $7,080 $7,121 

Civil Enforcement $110,482 $115,166 

Civil Rights / Title VI Compliance $12,114 $12,414 

Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs $25,806 $26,849 
 Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-5 

Resources by Program / Project 

(Dollars in Thousands)

Program / Project

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget 

Climate Protection Program $108,610 $109,420 

Commission for Environmental Cooperation $3,938 $3,949 

Compliance Assistance and Centers $28,072 $28,621 

Compliance Incentives $9,257 $9,371 

Compliance Monitoring $58,155 $62,217 

Congressional, Intergovernmental, External Relations $47,452 $48,550 

Criminal Enforcement $38,077 $39,256 

Drinking Water Programs $99,086 $100,948 

Endocrine Disruptors $9,003 $9,037 

Enforcement Training $4,039 $4,058 

Environment and Trade $1,703 $1,723 

Environmental Justice $5,044 $5,131 

Exchange Network $33,295 $27,762 

Facilities Infrastructure and Operations $418,841 $439,298 

Federal Stationary Source Regulations $23,702 $24,302 

Federal Support for Air Quality Management $97,038 $103,332 

Federal Support for Air Toxics Program $29,058 $27,764 

Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certification $60,447 $64,467 

Financial Assistance Grants / IAG Management $20,313 $23,262 

Forensics Support $18,258 $16,911 

Geographic Program: Chesapeake Bay $20,778 $20,817 

Geographic Program: Great Lakes $18,104 $21,195 

Geographic Program: Gulf of Mexico $4,432 $4,478 

Geographic Program: Lake Champlain $955 $955 

Geographic Program: Long Island Sound $477 $477 

Geographic Program: Other $4,763 $6,790 

Great Lakes Legacy Act $15,000 $45,000 

Homeland Security: Communication and Information $3,820 $4,320 

Homeland Security: Critical Infrastructure Protection $32,397 $11,859 

Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery $62,370 $56,399 

Homeland Security: Protection of EPA Personnel and Infrastructure $20,488 $20,544 

Human Health Risk Assessment $36,495 $36,832 

Human Resources Management $49,191 $48,553 

Indoor Air: Asthma Program $11,097 $11,197 

Indoor Air: Environment Tobacco Smoke Program $3,618 $3,695 

Indoor Air: Radon Program $5,871 $6,066 

Indoor Air: Schools and Workplace Program $11,176 $11,258 
Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-6

Resources by Program / Project 

(Dollars in Thousands)

Program / Project

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget 

Information Security $13,337 $4,697 

Infrastructure Assistance: Alaska Native Villages $40,000 $40,000 

Infrastructure Assistance: Brownfields Projects $120,500 $120,500 

Infrastructure Assistance: Clean School Bus Initiative $1,500 $65,000 

Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water SRF $850,000 $850,000 

Infrastructure Assistance: Drinking Water SRF $850,000 $850,000 

Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico Border $50,000 $50,000 

Infrastructure Assistance: Puerto Rico $8,000 $4,000 

International Capacity Building $6,177 $6,854 

IT / Data Management $137,766 $156,282 

Legal Advice: Environmental Program $34,723 $35,523 

Legal Advice: Support Program $12,241 $12,522 

LUST / UST $17,725 $17,594 

LUST Cooperative Agreements $58,399 $58,450 

Marine Pollution $12,050 $12,296 

National Estuary Program / Coastal Waterways $19,094 $19,229 

NEPA Implementation $12,315 $12,654 

Not Specified ($4,000) ($30,000)

Oil Spill: Prevention, Preparedness and Response $12,898 $13,065 

Pesticides: Field Programs $25,758 $27,186 

Pesticides: Registration of New Pesticides $35,982 $45,310 

Pesticides: Review / Reregistration of Existing Pesticides $64,314 $60,471 

Pollution Prevention Program $17,099 $22,496 

POPs Implementation $2,224 $2,235 

Radiation: Protection $18,865 $16,982 

Radiation: Response Preparedness $4,081 $4,850 

RCRA: Corrective Action $40,364 $40,976 

RCRA: Waste Management $67,382 $67,422 

RCRA: Waste Minimization & Recycling $12,772 $14,302 

Regional Geographic Initiatives $8,756 $8,800 

Regional Science and Technology $3,609 $3,626 

Regulatory Innovation $21,932 $21,992 

Regulatory/Economic-Management and Analysis $18,469 $18,552 

Research: Air Toxics $15,701 $17,639 

Research: Drinking Water $46,053 $46,118 

Research: Endocrine Disruptor $12,985 $8,044 

Research: Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) $4,012 $2,997 
 Appendix D: Budget Tables 

D-7 

Resources by Program / Project 

(Dollars in Thousands)

Program / Project

FY 2004 

President's 

Budget

FY 2005 

President's 

Budget 

Research: Human Health and Ecosystems $190,731 $177,408 

Research: Land Protection and Restoration $36,569 $33,059 

Research: Particulate Matter $63,621 $63,691 

Research: Pesticides and Toxics $36,785 $29,018 

Research: Pollution Prevention $38,999 $34,061 

Research: SITE Program $6,941 $6,928 

Research: Troposphere Ozone $4,942 $4,901 

Research: Water Quality $47,179 $46,810 

Research: Computational Toxicology $8,949 $13,029 

Research: Fellowships $6,403 $8,262 

Research: Global Change $21,529 $20,690 

Science Advisory Board $4,409 $4,757 

Science Policy and Biotechnology $1,604 $1,707 

Small Business Ombudsman $3,765 $3,839 

Small Minority Business Assistance $2,215 $2,282 

State and Local Prevention and Preparedness $12,508 $12,135 

Stratospheric Ozone: Domestic Programs $5,787 $5,840 

Stratospheric Ozone: Multilateral Fund $11,000 $13,500 

Superfund: Emergency Response and Removal $199,804 $201,088 

Superfund: Enforcement $155,308 $155,537 

Superfund: EPA Emergency Preparedness $10,130 $10,091 

Superfund: Federal Facilities $32,744 $32,182 

Superfund: Federal Facilities IAGs $10,023 $10,044 

Superfund: Remedial $732,043 $725,484 

Superfund: Support to Other Federal Agencies $10,676 $10,676 

Surface Water Protection $190,235 $191,797 

Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Management $9,243 $9,514 

Toxic Substances: Chemical Risk Review and Reduction $45,536 $45,879 

Toxic Substances: Lead Risk Reduction Program $14,833 $11,083 

TRI / Right to Know $14,691 $15,941 

Tribal - Capacity Building $10,494 $10,642 

US Mexico Border $6,484 $5,785 

Wetlands $19,300 $19,753 

TOTAL $7,626,537 $7,759,244 

Appendix E Acronyms 

E-1 

Environmental Protection Agency 

List of Acronyms 

AA Assistant Administrator 

ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution 

ARA Assistant Regional Administrator 

ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 

B&F Buildings and Facilities 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CAFO Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations 

CARE Community Action for a Renewed Environment 

CAP Clean Air Partnership Fund 

CBEP Community-Based Environmental Protection 

CCAP Climate Change Action Plan 

CCTI Climate Change Technology Initiative 

CEIS Center for Environmental Information and Statistics 

CFO Chief Financial Officer 

CSI Common Sense Initiative 

CSO Combined Sewer Overflows 

CWA Clean Water Act 

CWAP Clean Water Action Plan 

DBP Disinfectant By Products 

DfE Design for the Environment 

EDP Environmental Leadership Project 

EJ Environmental Justice 

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 

FCO Funds Certifying Officer 

FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 

FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act 

FMFIA Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act 

FQPA Food Quality Protection Act 

GAPG General Assistance Program Grants 

GHG Greenhouse Gas 

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act 

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 
Appendix E Acronyms 

E-2

ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 

ITMRA Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1995-AKA Clinger/Cohen Act 

LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology 

MUR Monthly Utilization Report 

NAAQs National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement 

NAPA National Academy of Public Administration 

NAS National Academy of Science 

NDPD National Data Processing Division 

NEP National Estuary Program 

NEPPS National Environmental Performance Partnership System 

NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

NOA New Obligation Authority 

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

NPL National Priority List 

NPM National Program Manager 

NPR National Performance Review 

NPS Non-Point Source 

OAM Office of Acquisition Management 

OA Office of the Administrator 

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 

OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

OEI Office of Environmental Information 

OERR Office of Emergency and Remedial Response 

OFA Other Federal Agencies 

OFPP Office of Federal Procurement Policy 

OGC Office of the General Counsel 

OIA Office of International Activities 

OIG Office of the Inspector General 

OMTR Open market trading rule 

OPAA Office of Planning, Analysis and Accountability 

OPPE Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation 

OPPTS Office of Pesticides, Prevention and Toxic Substances 

ORD Office of Research and Development 

OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

OTAG Ozone Transport Advisory Group 

OW Office of Water 

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 

PWSS Public Water System Supervision 
Appendix E Acronyms 

E-3 

RC Responsibility Center 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 

RGI Regional Geographic Initiative 

RMP Risk Management Plan 

RPIO Responsible Planning Implementation Office 

RR Reprogramming Request 

RWTA Rural Water Technical Assistance 

S&T Science and Technology 

SALC Suballocation (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 Maximun Daily Load 

TRI Toxic Release Inventory 

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act 

UIC Underground Injection Control 

UST Underground Storage Tanks 

WCF Working Capital Fund 

WIF Water Infrastructure Funds 

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Project