- Home
- Agencies
- Department of Agriculture
- Department of Housing and Urban Development
- General Services Administration
- Department of Commerce
- Department of the Interior
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- Department of Defense
- Department of Justice
- National Science Foundation
- Department of Education
- Department of Labor
- Office of Personnel Management
- Department of Energy
- Department of State
- Small Business Administration
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Department of Transportation
- Social Security Administration
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of the Treasury
- U.S. Agency for International Development
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Veterans Affairs
- Goals
- Initiatives
- Programs
Primary tabs
Key to Changes
This text is Revised text
This word has been added to the text
This text is Last Published text
This word has been removed from the text
Modifed styling with no visual changes
Barry BreenDeputy Assistant AdministratorOffice of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
FY 14-15: Agency Priority Goal
Clean up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of communities.
Priority Goal
Goal Overview
Problem or opportunity being addressed
EPA’s Superfund, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action (CA), leaking underground storage tank (LUST), and Brownfields cleanup programs reduce risks to human health and the environment by assessing and cleaning up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods. Challenging and complex environmental problems, such as the presence or perceived presence of hazardous substances in soil, sediment, and groundwater, persist at many contaminated properties, and can threaten the health of American families.
There are multiple benefits associated with cleaning up contaminated sites and making them ready for reuse: reducing mortality and morbidity risk; preventing and reducing human exposure to contaminants; making land available for commercial, residential, industrial, or recreational reuse; and promoting community economic development. When sites are ready for anticipated reuse, communities are able to reclaim them for ecological, recreational, commercial, residential and other productive purposes.
Since EPA began collecting the number of sites ready for anticipated use (RAU) in FY2008, the cumulative number of sites RAU has increased. As of the end of FY2013, 441,333 sites were made ready for anticipated use, or approximately 83% of all sites.
|
Program |
FY14 Target |
FY15 Target |
|
Superfund |
55 |
55 |
|
RCRA CA |
80 |
80 |
|
LUST |
9,000 |
8,600 |
|
Brownfields |
550 |
550 |
|
Total |
9,685 |
9,285 |
Although each program establishes its own targets, the collective nature and combined overall target of the RAU Priority Goal offers an opportunity for EPA cleanup programs to work together to identify lessons learned, efficiencies and opportunities to advance site cleanup.
Efficiencies and cost savings
In an effort to improve the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of EPA’s cleanup programs, EPA initiated the Integrated Cleanup Initiative, a multi-year effort to better use the most appropriate assessment and cleanup authorities to address a greater number of sites, accelerate cleanups where possible, and put those sites back into productive use while protecting human health and the environment. By using relevant tools available in each of the cleanup programs, including enforcement, EPA will better leverage the resources available to address needs at individual sites. EPA will focus on enforcement activities that are critical to ensuring that responsible parties are compelled to clean up contaminated sites, thereby preserving federal monies for clean up at sites where viable responsible parties do not exist.
Relationship to agency strategic goals and objectives
The Priority Goal directly supports EPA’s FY2014-2018 Strategic Plan, specifically Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development. Over the next several years, two of EPA’s priorities under this goal are to prevent and reduce exposure to contaminants and accelerate the pace of cleanups across the country. RAU is an indicator that the local, state, or federal agency has determined that cleanup goals and engineering and institutional controls have been implemented for the media that affects current and reasonably anticipated future use so that the sites are available for communities to use or reuse. Making contaminated sites ready for anticipated reuse also supports several of the Administrator’s Themes for EPA, including Making a Visible Difference in Communities across the Country; Launching a New Era of State, Tribal and Local Partnerships; and Working Toward a Sustainable Future. These connections are further described in the overview of our goal, as well as our description of goal partners.
Strategies
Implementation Strategy
EPA’s implementation strategy for this Priority Goal focuses on improving the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of EPA’s cleanup programs. Each of OSWER’s cleanup programs (Superfund, RCRA corrective action, Brownfields, and LUST) contribute to this goal to drive performance for all of our cleanup programs and potentially leverage program expertise and apply lessons learned. Superfund regularly reviews the status of all NPL sites, including identifying eligible deleted sites and particular construction completed sites that are good candidates for RAU designation.
Each program has its own set of challenges and barriers (described in the next section). EPA is applying lessons learned from the Priority Goal implementation in FY2012-2013 and building them into the quarterly Priority Goal milestones to enhance progress in FY2014-2015, as well as address these barriers and challeges. To measure and report overall progress, each of EPA’s land cleanup programs have set annual targets toward making sites RAU.
Program managers at EPA headquarters coordinate the development of these goals with their regional counterparts and reach out to state and tribal implementers for their input. Annually, OSWER releases a National Program Manager’s (NPM) guidance which provides direction to the regional office to meet the national priorities. These measures are part of the NPM guidance. OSWER holds regional planning meetings and regularly scheduled monthly conference calls with regional management to assess performance. The outcomes of these conversations are incorporated into the reporting for the quarterly milestones.
Key barriers and challenges
- OSWER tracks over 500,000 sites, representing about 22 million acres of land.
- As a result of recent resource constraints affecting programs that cleanup contaminated sites for both EPA and our Federal and State partners, the pace of ongoing construction projects is expected to be slowed, extending the timeline to achieve site cleanup and the return of sites to productive use.
- The majority of the Superfund and RCRA corrective action accomplishments take place during the 3rd & 4th quarters making it a challenge to demonstrate progress during the first two quarters of the year. EPA’s authority and control over contaminated sites varies depending on the statutory authority under which the site is being addressed. Sites undergoing cleanup through the Superfund program provide the Agency with the most direct control through its authority to order the cleanup, provide oversight, seek penalties for non-compliance, and negotiating the cleanup process. The Agency can delegate all or parts of the RCRA program to states to manage in lieu of EPA. For the RCRA Corrective Action Program, 44 states are authorized to implement the federal program and have the primary decision-making responsibility to ensure safe long-term remedies. In unauthorized states, and where work share arrangements have been made, the EPA Regions are the lead for ensuring protective long-term remedies. The Agency retains enforcement authority at state delegated sites to ensure the proper cleanup and management of hazardous wastes. The Brownfield program provides funding to eligible entities to cleanup sites. Brownfield sites are cleaned up in accordance with state cleanup levels and oversight. The Brownfields’ data are self-reported by grantees. Cleanups being conducted under the Underground Storage Tank program are typically conducted and overseen through state programs; however, EPA typically conducts the cleanup from leaking underground storage tanks on tribal lands. The EPA’s ability to oversee and manage the long-term stewardship of contaminated sites must be based on these differences in its legal authority, and state and local governments’ responsibilities.
- Any determination made for the purposes of the RAU measure is based on the information at the time the determination is made and may change if the site’s conditions change or if new or additional information is discovered regarding the contamination or conditions on the site.
- A limitation in applying RAU to LUST is the inability at this point in time to identify whether any institutional controls (ICs), if needed, are in place. EPA recognizes this limitation as an inconsistency with the RAU definition and is working with states, which are responsible for determining RAU status, to develop a baseline of current practices related to long term protectiveness. Nonetheless, we believe the LUST measure is a good indicator of sites ready for anticipated use, given the states’ determination that no further action is currently necessary to protect human health and the environment.
- Data for all programs requires time to validate and verify the information provided.
- EPA does not have verified quarterly data for every program office.
Progress Update
The Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) tracks over 500,000 sites, representing more than 23 million acres of land. EPA’s Superfund, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action (CA), leaking underground stor¬age tank (LUST), and Brownfields cleanup programs reduce risks to human health and the envi¬ronment by assessing and cleaning up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods. Challenging and complex environmental problems, such as the presence or perceived presence of hazardous substances in soil, sediment, and ground¬water, persist at many contaminated properties, and can threaten the health of American families.
EPA accomplished a total of 10,675 sites in FY 2015, for a total Result of 21,836 RAU sites for FY 14/15 RAU, surpassing its target for FY14/15 of 18,970 by 15%. Although each program establishes its own targets, the collective nature and combined overall target of the RAU Priority Goal offers an opportunity for EPA cleanup programs to work together to identify lessons learned, efficiencies and opportunities to advance site cleanup. Since EPA began collecting the number of sites RAU in FY 2008, the number of sites RAU has increased by approximately 22% to over 463,500 sites at the end of FY 2015, which is approximately 87% of total number of sites EPA tracks.
However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the pace of RAU. Over the past few years, the number of Superfund sites RAU has consistently decreased and the number of RCRA corrective action sites made RAU is slowing down. Many of the remaining sites are some of the most complex facilities which extends the timeline to achieve site cleanup. Maintaining RAU as the priority goal focuses senior management attention on an important indicator of program outcomes.
Next Steps
Expand All
Performance Indicators
Number of Superfund sites RAU site-wide.
Number of brownfields sites ready for reuse.
Number of RCRA corrective action facilities made RAU.
Number of LUST cleanups completed that meet risk-based standards for human exposure and groundwater migration.
Total Number of Sites RAU
Contributing Programs & Other Factors
Contributing programs within the agency
The lead office is the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER). The key official is Barry Breen, the Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator of OSWER. All of OSWER’s cleanup programs (Superfund, RCRA corrective action, Brownfields, and LUST) contribute to this goal and take positive action to protect human health and the environment through the cleanup and revitalization of contaminated properties. OSWER programs collaborate with EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance to deliver environmental results as One EPA.
Contributing programs or partners outside the agency
EPA recognizes that it must work in concert with the states, tribes, local governments, and sister federal agencies that constitute our country's environmental protection enterprise, to ensure the efficiency, efficacy, and coordination of our overlapping and complementary efforts. In some cases, states are authorized to operate cleanup programs, while in others they are partners. Where other federal agencies are designated as the lead for the cleanup actions at their sites, EPA's environmental cleanup goals are subject to, and reliant on, the lead federal agencies' cleanup budgets, execution, and site cleanup performance. EPA recognizes the need to work with our co-regulators to build tools and strategies that enhance coordination and manage resources effectively.
Expand All
Strategic Goals
Strategic Goal:
Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development
Statement:
Clean up communities, advance sustainable development, and protect disproportionately impacted low-income and minority communities. Prevent releases of harmful substances and clean up and restore contaminated areas.
Strategic Objectives
Statement:
Support sustainable, resilient, and livable communities by working with local, state, tribal, and federal partners to promote smart growth, emergency preparedness and recovery planning, redevelopment and reuse of contaminated and formerly contaminated sites, and the equitable distribution of environmental benefits.
Description:
EPA supports the goals of urban, suburban, and rural communities to grow in ways that improve the environment, human health, and quality of life for their residents.[1] With the support of partners working hand in hand across all levels of government, communities can grow in ways that also strengthen the economy, help them adapt to a changing climate, improve their resiliency to disasters, use public resources more efficiently, revitalize neighborhoods, and improve access to jobs and amenities. By making sustainable infrastructure investments, communities can successfully build innovative and functional systems on neighborhood streets and sidewalks to deal with the runoff from stormwater and still provide easy access for pedestrians, bicyclists, on-street parking, and other beneficial uses. By adopting local planning and zoning codes that account for the environmental impacts of development, the private sector can more easily construct market-ready green buildings serving a range of housing needs. Communities also can benefit from tools, technology, and research that better engage citizens and inform local decision making to support smart and sustainable growth.
EPA recognizes environmental justice, children’s health, and sustainable development are all at the intersection of people and place. These goals are not mutually exclusive. Throughout all our work to achieve more livable communities, EPA is committed to ensuring we focus on children’s health and environmental justice.[2] Recognizing that minority or low-income communities may face disproportionate environmental risks, we work to protect these communities from adverse health and environmental effects and to ensure they are given the opportunity to participate meaningfully in environmental decisions and efforts to plan for future growth and development that directly affect residents.[3] EPA’s ability to optimize the benefits of sustainability requires making environmental justice a normal part of how EPA does business rather than an ad hoc activity.
Sustainable and livable communities balance their economic and natural assets so that the diverse needs of residents can be met with limited environmental impacts. EPA’s community-based programs help to accomplish these goals by working with communities, other federal agencies, state, tribal, and regional governments, private and nonprofit sectors, and national experts to encourage equitable development strategies that have better outcomes for air quality, water quality, and land preservation and revitalization. In particular, EPA’s smart growth program delivers technical assistance to communities through contract- and grant-based programs to help them base their growth and development decisions on strategies that are smart, sustainable, and supportive of improved environmental, public health, and economic outcomes.
For example, EPA has been working with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) since 2009 to align federal resources and improve the environmental outcomes from development. Through technical assistance, grants, and training, these three agencies have worked together to assist hundreds of communities to plan for and invest in growth that improves access to affordable housing, increases transportation options, and expands choices for all citizens.[4] All three agencies use a common set of “livability principles” to better coordinate their efforts and investments in a manner that will better protect the environment, promote equitable development, and help address the challenges of a changing climate.
EPA’s brownfields program emphasizes environmental and human health protection in a manner that stimulates economic development and job creation by awarding competitive grants to assess and clean up brownfield properties that are contaminated, or perceived to be contaminated, with hazardous substances and/or petroleum contamination and by providing job training opportunities, particularly in underserved communities.[5] A 2012 EPA program evaluation concluded that cleaning up brownfield properties leads to residential property value increases of 5.1 to 12.8 percent.[6] In addition, a 2011 study of five pilot projects revealed that cleaning up contaminated properties for neighborhood commercial use may contribute to a 32 to 57 percent reduction in vehicle miles traveled compared to alternative development scenarios.[7] This reduction results from increased accessibility of neighborhood-based services and goods, requiring less frequent trips by residents outside the immediate area.
The brownfields program also provides funding for state and tribal environmental response programs as well as outreach and technical assistance to communities. Area-wide planning approaches for brownfields work help to identify important local factors in a coordinated manner: viable end uses of individual or groups of brownfield properties; beneficial air and water infrastructure investments in these areas; and, added environmental improvements in the surrounding area to revitalize the community. Taken together, these efforts will enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods in and around brownfield properties.
In addition to the brownfields activities, EPA promotes livable communities though its efforts to prevent chemical accidents. EPA's risk management program requires facilities with one or more covered chemicals in a process to analyze the potential for accidental releases and possible consequences, develop an accident prevention program, and coordinate with the community to ensure that all are prepared for responding to a release. The facility must include this information in a Risk Management Plan (RMP) and submit this RMP electronically to EPA, which makes the information available to federal, state, and local officials (e.g., fire fighters) who work on chemical accident preparedness, prevention, and response. There are approximately 13,000 active RMPs currently on file.
External Factors and Emerging Issues
There are several external factors and emerging issues that may affect the overall success of the Agency’s brownfields, chemical risk management, and smart growth programs. These include:
- The continued challenges posed by foreclosures and vacant, blighted, and neglected properties. Increased attention may be required for the siting of new domestic manufacturing in formerly abandoned or blighted areas and the potential impacts on local communities.
- The impacts of increased extremes of weather on a community’s redevelopment and revitalization plans, including whether these projects are resilient enough to withstand the threat of flooding or loss of power from natural or man-made disasters.
- The lack of capacity in many tribal, local, regional, and state governments to adequately identify the environmental outcomes associated with land use and infrastructure decisions, particularly given the demands on already tight budgets.
- The importance of engaging in efforts that involve stakeholders beyond federal agencies. These efforts include supporting local responders, advancing additional chemical plant safety measures, and standardizing the best practices of industry leaders.
The need to explore how EPA’s legal authorities and policies can be used to further improve coordination among federal agencies and stakeholders in our efforts to identify and address the potential hazards in chemical plant safety.
End Notes:
- For more information about the impact of the built environment on the natural environment and public health, see “Our Built and Natural Environments: A Technical Review of the Interactions Between Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Quality (Second Edition, 2013)” at http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/built.htm.
- For more information about EPA’s focus on Environmental Justice, please see http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/index.html.
- For more information about the connections between smart growth and environmental justice, see “Creating Equitable, Healthy, and Sustainable Communities: Strategies for Advancing Smart Growth, Environmental Justice, and Equitable Development” (EPA 231-K-10-005, 2013) at http://epa.gov/smartgrowth/equitable_development_report.htm.
- For more information about the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities, see http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov.
- For more information about EPA’s brownfields program, see http://www.epa.gov/brownfields.
- Kevin Haninger, Lala Ma, and Christopher Timmins. 2012. “Estimating the Impacts of Brownfields Remediation on Housing Property Values.” Duke Environmental Economics Working Paper Series. Working Paper EE12-08. The program evaluation is available at http://sites.nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/environmentaleconomics/files/2013/01/WP-EE-12-08.pdf.
- U.S. EPA, Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization, Air and Water Impacts of Brownfields Redevelopment: A Study of Five Communities, April 2011, EPA-560-F-10-232.
Statement:
Conserve resources and prevent land contamination by reducing waste generation and toxicity, promoting proper management of waste and petroleum products, and increasing sustainable materials management.
Description:
To prevent future environmental contamination and to protect the health of the estimated 20 million people living within a mile of hazardous waste management facilities[1], EPA and its state partners continue their efforts to issue, update, or maintain Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permits for approximately 20,000 hazardous waste units (such as incinerators and landfills) at these facilities. EPA also will issue polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup, storage, and disposal approvals each year since this work cannot be delegated to the states or tribes. With the October 2012 promulgation of the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act, improving and modernizing hazardous waste transportation and tracking has become an important Agency focus. EPA will be working with state agencies, other partners and stakeholders, and the public to implement the requirements of the new law. These include the use of electronic tracking (e-Manifest), which will provide superior data availability, transparency, and cost savings when compared with the use of paper manifests, and the establishment of an advisory board to provide recommendations to the Agency on the implementation of this new e-Manifest approach.
As part of its sustainable materials management program, EPA is currently promoting three national strategies—the Federal Green Challenge, the Electronics Challenge, and the Food Recovery Challenge. These strategies are focused on using less environmentally intensive and toxic materials and employing downstream solutions, like reuse and recycling, to conserve our resources for future generations.[2] EPA is working with other federal agencies, state and tribal governments, and non-governmental organizations to promote sustainability goals through these and other initiatives. For example, EPA and USDA are partnering through the U.S. Food Waste Challenge to address sustainable food management from farm to final disposition.[3] Through this partnership, EPA is working to reduce food waste, which is the largest component (21 percent) of municipal solid waste discarded.[4] In keeping with the RCRA mandate to conserve resources and energy, and recognizing that an estimated 42 percent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are attributable to materials management activities, EPA continues to create innovative strategies that emphasize sustainable materials management. These efforts—to identify and reduce or minimize the impact of waste and capture resultant GHG benefits through more sustainable materials management throughout all life-cycle stages (from extraction of raw materials through end of life)—are critical, along with other activities, for offsetting the use of virgin materials.[5,6]
To reduce the risk posed by underground storage tanks (USTs) located at more than 200,000 facilities throughout the country, EPA and states are working to ensure that every UST system is inspected at least once every 3 years and all facility operators are trained. As fuel types change, UST systems must be equipped to safely store the new fuels. For example, EPA is working to ensure biofuels are stored in compatible UST systems.
External Factors and Emerging Issues
EPA must be prepared to address significant waste management issues anticipated for the future.
- The potential impacts of a changing climate, including extreme weather events, such as tornadoes and hurricanes.
- Continued changes in technology and the emergence of new waste streams that result from new methods of domestic energy development, among other contributing sources.
- General trend away from landfills and toward the recycling of materials using new technologies that will require further evaluation.
Endnotes:
- Estimate drawn from OSWER Near Site Population Database, an internal EPA database that merges facility size and location information from RCRAInfo with population data, at the block and block group levels, from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2000 Census. The demographics were captured around the total number of facilities that have approved controls in place that result in the protection of this population (20 million people).
- For more information on the Federal Green Challenge, see http://www.epa.gov/federalgreenchallenge. For more information on the Electronics Challenge, see http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/smm/electronics/. For more information on the Food Recovery Challenge, see http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/smm/foodrecovery/.
- For more information on the U.S. Food Waste Challenge, see http://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/index.htm.
- For more information, see EPA report, “Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Facts and Figures for 2011,” at http://www.epa.gov/waste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/MSWcharacterization_508_053113_fs.pdf.
- USEPA, Opportunities to Reduce or Avoid Greenhouse Gas Emissions through Materials and Land Management Practices, September 2009.
- For more information on sustainable materials management, see Sustainable Materials Management: The Road Ahead. EPA 530R-09-009. Available at http://www.epa.gov/smm/pdf/vision2.pdf.
Statement:
Prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional releases of contaminants and clean up and restore polluted sites for reuse.
Description:
Challenging and complex environmental problems persist at many contaminated properties. These include contaminated soil, sediment, and groundwater that can cause human health concerns. Together with our federal, state, and tribal partners, EPA’s Superfund program, RCRA corrective actions, leaking underground storage tank and brownfields cleanup programs, and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) cleanups of PCBs reduce risks to human health and the environment through site cleanup and the return of restored land to productive use. EPA is establishing an Agency Priority Goal for FY 2014-2015, which is a continuation of the Priority Goal for FY 2012-2013, to measure and report sites ready for anticipated use (RAU). RAU is an indicator that the local, state, or federal agency has determined that the necessary cleanup goals, engineering controls, and institutional controls have been implemented at the site to make it available for a community’s current or reasonably anticipated future use or reuse. EPA’s Superfund, RCRA corrective action, leaking underground storage tank (LUST), and brownfields cleanup programs all contribute to the Priority Goal to make sites ready for anticipated use.[1] Although each program establishes its own targets, the collective nature and combined overall target of the RAU Priority Goal offers an opportunity for EPA cleanup programs to work together to identify lessons learned, efficiencies, and opportunities to advance site cleanup. From the inception of the respective programs to the end of FY 2013, 441,333 sites were made RAU, corresponding to over 2.3 million acres.[2]
There are multiple benefits associated with cleaning up contaminated sites: reducing mortality and morbidity risk; preventing and reducing human exposure to contaminants; making land available for commercial, residential, industrial, or recreational reuse; and, promoting community economic development. A 2011 study suggests that Superfund cleanups reduce the incidence of congenital anomalies in infants of mothers living within 2,000 meters of a site by roughly 20-25 percent.[3] In another case, EPA contracted with researchers at Duke University and the University of Pittsburgh to conduct a study to determine the effects of Superfund site status on housing values. The study found that when sites are cleaned up and deleted from the National Priorities List (NPL), properties within 3 miles of the sites experience an 18.6 to 24.5 percent increase in value.[4]
Over the past 3 years, EPA has implemented the Integrated Cleanup Initiative (ICI) in an effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its land cleanup programs. More than 150 different actions were conducted under ICI from FY 2010 through FY 2012 by the various land cleanup programs involved in the effort. These actions to improve efficiency and effectiveness are now part of current business procedures and cleanup processes. For example, EPA initiated a series of project management pilots to explore options for accelerating the pace of Superfund site cleanups from the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) phase of cleanup through site completion. Three of these pilots improved the remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA) process and were completed in FY 2012. EPA’s Superfund program will consider applying the time- and cost-saving approaches examined in these pilots wherever appropriate.[5]
EPA's Superfund program is undertaking a comprehensive review of all aspects of the program. The goal of this review is to determine the best way to maintain the program's effectiveness in protecting human health and the environment by more efficiently managing its site cleanup process and program resources. In the same spirit, in early 2013, EPA worked with state partners and stakeholders to pilot an ambitious effort to apply “Lean” principles to the facility investigation phase of RCRA corrective action cleanup as a means to accelerate the process for a typical facility by several years.[6] By applying Lean techniques, EPA expects to achieve performance improvements and to continue setting and achieving ambitious goals for environmental progress. The Agency will continue to solicit new ideas and practices to improve EPA’s cleanup programs.
Another challenge to protecting our land resources from contamination is pollution from leaking underground storage tanks (USTs). While considerable progress has been made to clean up leaks from USTs, a backlog of over 80,000 sites remains and the number of cleanups per year is decreasing. To understand the makeup of remaining UST releases and the decline in the number of cleanups per year, EPA conducted a two-phase, data-driven analysis of UST cleanups as of 2006 and 2009. The study compiled and analyzed available data from 14 state [L]UST programs and identified key findings and potential opportunities to help reduce the number of remaining UST cleanups. To address new and existing LUST sites, EPA, in partnership with state and tribal programs, is developing and implementing strategies to address technical challenges, leverage best practices, and support management, oversight, and enforcement activities. In addition, EPA has implemented improvements in the LUST prevention program by increasing inspection frequency and other prevention efforts, and there has been a corresponding decrease in new confirmed releases. The efforts of the prevention program and the continued reduction in new confirmed releases, along with the earlier detection of releases, will remain critical factors in backlog reduction.[7]
In addition to cleanup and revitalization, EPA’s hazardous waste programs also are working to reduce the energy use and environmental footprint during the investigation and remediation of hazardous waste sites. As part of this effort, EPA’s Superfund program evaluated its green remediation strategy to assess its experiences in implementing the strategy, to determine a baseline against which to measure future progress, and to develop the best metrics for measuring the program’s success. The evaluation’s findings are being used to prepare the next phase of the strategy to reduce the energy, water, and materials used during site cleanups while at the same time ensuring that protective remedies are implemented.[8]
Throughout this work, EPA is enhancing its engagement with local communities and stakeholders so that they may meaningfully participate in decisions on land cleanup, emergency response, and management of hazardous substances and waste. Enhancing community engagement helps to ensure transparent and accessible decision-making processes, to deliver information that communities can use to participate effectively, to improve EPA responsiveness to community perspectives, and to ensure timely cleanup decisions.
National preparedness is an essential component in EPA’s work that entails responding to large-scale emergencies that may involve chemicals, oil, biological agents, radiation, weapons of mass destruction, or natural catastrophes. In recent years, the U.S. has faced considerable challenges in responding to nationally significant incidents and large-scale emergencies, including Hurricane Katrina, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant emergency in Japan, and Hurricane Sandy. Maintaining our preparedness level and ensuring that emergency responders are able to address chemical spills, unplanned releases of other hazardous materials, and other catastrophes are vital responsibilities. Consistent with the government-wide National Response Framework and the National Disaster Recovery Framework, EPA prepares for the possibility of multiple, simultaneous, nationally significant incidents across several regions and provides guidance and technical assistance to state, tribal, and local planning and response organizations. EPA recognizes the important role of state and local emergency responders and works with them to strengthen their preparedness and provide technical assistance when significant man-made or natural incidents strain their staffing and budget resources.
External Factors and Emerging Issues
Hazardous waste programs are intended to provide permanent solutions to contamination at sites or facilities to the extent practicable. As appropriate, EPA must incorporate emerging science into decision making to maintain its commitment to provide permanent solutions.
- Complications can arise when new scientific information (e.g., new toxicity information or a new analytical method) calls into question previous determinations about the need for or the scope and methods of cleanup at a site. Such scientific and technological developments may complicate relations with affected communities, risk communication, site investigation, remedy selection, and resource allocation within the program.
- Changes in precipitation, sea level rise, and storm surge, for example, may impact remedies and alter their effectiveness. Some evidence of this was apparent during the Hurricane Sandy event along the coasts and waterways of New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. EPA might appropriately consider the effects on planned, current, and completed cleanups that will occur from the impacts of a changing climate.
Endnotes:
- FY 2014-2015 Agency Priority Goal: Clean up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of communities. By September 30, 2015, an additional 18,970 sites will be made ready for anticipated use, protecting Americans and the environment one community at a time. For the LUST program, data as to whether institutional controls are in place are unavailable. EPA is exploring with states whether the data can be made available.
- Although separate performance targets are not developed for the number of acres RAU, the acres RAU are reported at the end of each fiscal year.
- Janet Currie, Michael Greenstone, and Enrico Moretti. 2011. "Superfund Cleanups and Infant Health." American Economic Review, 101(3): 435-41.
- S. Gamper-Rabindran and C. Timmins. 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing values? Evidence of spatially localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.
- A recent directive from EPA’s Superfund program shares the lessons learned from these RD/RA pilot studies. This directive can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oswer/docs/ici/broader_applications_rd_ra_pilot_project_lessons_learned.pdf.
- Lean principles focus on identifying and enhancing valuable process steps while reducing wasteful steps. See also http://www.epa.gov/lean/government/index.htm.
- For more information, please see The National LUST Cleanup Backlog: A Study of Opportunities at http://www.epa.gov/swerust1/cat/backlog.html.
- More information about Superfund and green remediation at EPA is available at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/greenremediation.
Statement:
Directly implement federal environmental programs in Indian country and support federal program delegation to tribes. Provide tribes with technical assistance and support capacity development for the establishment and implementation of sustainable environmental programs in Indian country.
Description:
Under federal environmental statutes, EPA is responsible for protecting human health and the environment in Indian country. EPA’s commitment to tribal environmental and human health protection has been steadfast for nearly 30 years, as formally established in the Agency’s 1984 Indian Policy.[1] EPA works with over 560 federally-recognized tribes located across the United States to improve environmental and human health outcomes. Approximately 56 million acres are held in trust by the United States for various Indian tribes and individuals. Over 10 millon acres of individually owned lands are still held in trust for allotees and their heirs.[2] Difficult environmental and health challenges remain in many of these areas, including lack of access to safe drinking water, sanitation, adequate waste facilities, and other environmental safeguards taken for granted elsewhere.
In collaboration with our tribal government partners, EPA will engage in a two-part strategy for strengthening human health and environmental protection in Indian country. First, EPA will ensure that its environmental protection programs are implemented in Indian country either by EPA or through implementation of environmental programs by tribes themselves. Second, EPA will provide resources through grant funds and technical assistance for federally-recognized tribes to create and maintain effective environmental program capacity.
External Factors and Emerging Issues
Tribal environmental and human health needs are significant. For example, the lack of access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation for tribes continues to threaten the public health of American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities. Approximately 12 percent of AI/AN homes do not have safe water and/or basic sanitation facilities.[3] This is high compared to the non-native homes in the U.S. that lack such infrastructure. EPA, along with over four federal departments and agencies, provides a range of federal water infrastructure programs to tribes, consistent with our legal authorities and the federal trust responsibility.
There is a broad spectrum among tribes with respect to population, culture, income, geography, economic development, environmental program management expertise, and priorities. EPA also recognizes that many tribes may not have the capacity to implement programs in a manner similar to a state, where programmatically available. Further, the decision to be treated in a manner similar to a state (TAS) is voluntary, and may not be a priority to a tribe. Currently, over 200 tribes are not eligible for jurisdictional reasons to receive a TAS designation to implement federally authorized environmental protection programs, yet they are partnering with EPA to build programmatic capacity in other ways. EPA continues to play a critical role in ensuring environmental protection in Indian country.
Endnotes:
- The “EPA Policy for the Administration of Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations” can be found at http://www.epa.gov/tp/pdf/indian-policy-84.pdf.
- For more information, please see http://www.bia.gov/FAQs/index.htm.
- Indian Health Service, Sanitation Facilities Construction Program 2011 Annual Report.
Agency Priority Goals
Statement:
Clean up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of communities. By 2015, an additional 18,970 sites will be made ready for anticipated use protecting Americans and the environment one community at a time.
Description:
Problem or opportunity being addressed
EPA’s Superfund, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action (CA), leaking underground storage tank (LUST), and Brownfields cleanup programs reduce risks to human health and the environment by assessing and cleaning up contaminated sites to enhance the livability and economic vitality of neighborhoods. Challenging and complex environmental problems, such as the presence or perceived presence of hazardous substances in soil, sediment, and groundwater, persist at many contaminated properties, and can threaten the health of American families.
There are multiple benefits associated with cleaning up contaminated sites and making them ready for reuse: reducing mortality and morbidity risk; preventing and reducing human exposure to contaminants; making land available for commercial, residential, industrial, or recreational reuse; and promoting community economic development. When sites are ready for anticipated reuse, communities are able to reclaim them for ecological, recreational, commercial, residential and other productive purposes.
Since EPA began collecting the number of sites ready for anticipated use (RAU) in FY2008, the cumulative number of sites RAU has increased. As of the end of FY2013, 441,333 sites were made ready for anticipated use, or approximately 83% of all sites.
|
Program |
FY14 Target |
FY15 Target |
|
Superfund |
55 |
55 |
|
RCRA CA |
80 |
80 |
|
LUST |
9,000 |
8,600 |
|
Brownfields |
550 |
550 |
|
Total |
9,685 |
9,285 |
Although each program establishes its own targets, the collective nature and combined overall target of the RAU Priority Goal offers an opportunity for EPA cleanup programs to work together to identify lessons learned, efficiencies and opportunities to advance site cleanup.
Efficiencies and cost savings
In an effort to improve the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of EPA’s cleanup programs, EPA initiated the Integrated Cleanup Initiative, a multi-year effort to better use the most appropriate assessment and cleanup authorities to address a greater number of sites, accelerate cleanups where possible, and put those sites back into productive use while protecting human health and the environment. By using relevant tools available in each of the cleanup programs, including enforcement, EPA will better leverage the resources available to address needs at individual sites. EPA will focus on enforcement activities that are critical to ensuring that responsible parties are compelled to clean up contaminated sites, thereby preserving federal monies for clean up at sites where viable responsible parties do not exist.
Relationship to agency strategic goals and objectives
The Priority Goal directly supports EPA’s FY2014-2018 Strategic Plan, specifically Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development. Over the next several years, two of EPA’s priorities under this goal are to prevent and reduce exposure to contaminants and accelerate the pace of cleanups across the country. RAU is an indicator that the local, state, or federal agency has determined that cleanup goals and engineering and institutional controls have been implemented for the media that affects current and reasonably anticipated future use so that the sites are available for communities to use or reuse. Making contaminated sites ready for anticipated reuse also supports several of the Administrator’s Themes for EPA, including Making a Visible Difference in Communities across the Country; Launching a New Era of State, Tribal and Local Partnerships; and Working Toward a Sustainable Future. These connections are further described in the overview of our goal, as well as our description of goal partners.
Statement:
By September 30, 2015 reduce reporting burdens to EPA by one million hours through streamlined regulations, provide real-time environmental data to at least two communities, and establish a new portal to service the regulated community and public.
Description:
Environmental regulators face ever growing needs to share information within and across agencies, reduce staff burden of data entry, reduce regulatory reporting burdens, and improve environmental and human health protection. There is also an increasing expectation from the public and regulated community for the use of on-line systems and the desire for data transparency and personalized access. Both federal and state agencies recognize that easier access to and use of environmental data will facilitate better environmental protection and decision-making while also increasing overall data transparency.
Consistent with the 2012 White House Digital Government Strategy and Executive Order 13563, EPA seeks to transform the way business is conducted. E-Enterprise for the Environment is a joint initiative of states and EPA to improve environmental outcomes and enhance service to the regulated community and the public by maximizing the use of advanced monitoring and information technologies, optimizing operations, and increasing transparency. E-Enterprise will enable new environmental management approaches by modernizing EPA programs and regulations while streamlining and improving existing business processes. E-Enterprise will use the transformational capabilities of information and advanced monitoring technologies to identify and implement programmatic and service improvements.
These improvements will include “smart” tools and services that guide the regulated community in understanding and fulfilling their federal, state and, local regulatory reporting obligations, offer basic validations and error checking of entered information, and support electronic signature submissions. E-Enterprise projects that take advantage of tools and practices such as advanced monitoring technology and streamlined data collection will also expand the ability of the government, regulated entities, and the public to see and measure pollutant discharges, emissions and environmental conditions. A fundamental premise of E-Enterprise is that providing a more complete and integrated (cross media - air, water, and land) view of environmental data can support greener behavior of the public and regulated entities. For example, broad availability of high-speed internet allows real-time reporting of emissions and provides unprecedented opportunities for transparency and public involvement in matters affecting local environmental conditions. These technological advances will allow better tracking of environmental progress. Innovative technology can also help regulators improve compliance with environmental laws.
