1. An inspection is a compliance monitoring activity performed on-site at a regulated facility or activity; OfCM activities are performed off-site typically at an office. Manually-reported SDWA UIC activities were not reported as an inspection or OfCM, so we could not determine if they were performed on-site or off-site. Therefore, starting in FY 2021, the Office of Compliance required all SDWA UIC activities to be appropriately reported as either inspections or OfCM in ICIS in order to be included in Annual Results.
2. Prior to FY 2020, OECA used a different methodology for deciding which off-site compliance monitoring activities would be reported in its Annual Results and did not collect data on all off-site compliance monitoring activities conducted. The totals for FY 2019 and earlier years reflect the prior methodology. Use caution when comparing FY 2020, FY 2021, and FY 2022 results to prior years.

1. An inspection is determined to have been performed in an area with potential EJ concerns either based on the EJScreen value or on the results of a more detailed review performed. This data is reported for each inspection performed by EPA and reported to ICIS.
2. Inspections labeled “EJ Not Applicable” were performed under a regulatory program for which an EJ analysis could not reliably be conducted because they may affect many different communities (e.g., vehicle imports).
3. Inspections labeled “EJ Score Not Available” are missing the required EJ data in ICIS.

1. Totals include Initiations and Conclusions of regulatory cases as well as CERCLA cases.

1. Full Time Equivalent (FTE) reflects the number of employees dedicated to implement the national civil enforcement program.

1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014. EPA relies on EJScreen, which was peer reviewed in early 2014 and released to the public in 2015.
2. Area of Potential EJ Concern “Yes” are Cases which address at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. Area of Potential EJ Concern “No” are Cases where none of the facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern. EJ Not Applicable refers to Cases for which an EJ analysis could not reliably be conducted because they may affect many different communities (e.g., pesticide imports).
3. The number of conclusions on this bar chart are slightly lower than the total number of conclusions that EPA obtained because cases initiated prior to FY 2014 are excluded.

1. The term “Injunctive relief” refers to actions mandated by an enforcement action that a regulated entity must perform, or refrain from performing, to bring that entity into compliance with environmental laws. The chart shows the estimated cost of all such mandated actions resulting from enforcement case conclusions in that fiscal year.
2. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
3. Dollar figures referenced in the bullets are not adjusted to reflect inflation/deflation.

1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014. EPA relies on EJScreen which was peer reviewed in early 2014 and released to the public in 2015.
2. These Environmental Justice values are also included in the previous slide that displays the total estimated value of injunctive relief.
3. Cost of Complying Actions totals, adjusted for inflation, are shown from cases which have at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. For multi-facility cases where only some facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern, the Cost of Complying Actions is adjusted for the percentage of the facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
4. The term “Injunctive relief” refers to actions mandated by an enforcement action that a regulated entity must perform, or refrain from performing, to bring that entity into compliance with environmental laws. The chart shows the estimated cost of all such mandated actions resulting from enforcement case conclusions in that fiscal year.
5. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.

1. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
2. Dollar figures referenced in the bullets are not adjusted to reflect inflation/deflation.

1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014. EPA relies on EJScreen, which was peer reviewed in early 2014 and released to the public in 2015.
2. These Environmental Justice values are also included in the previous slide that displays the total estimated penalties assessed.
3. Penalty assessed totals, adjusted for inflation, are shown from cases which have at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. For multi-facility cases where only some facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern, the penalty assessed amount is adjusted for the percentage of the facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
4. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.

1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014. EPA relies on EJScreen, which was peer reviewed in early 2014 and released to the public in 2015.
2. These Environmental Justice values are also included in the previous slide that displays the total pounds of air, water, and toxics reduced, treated or eliminated.
3. Air, toxics, and water pounds reduced totals are shown from cases which have at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. For multi-facility cases where only some facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern, the pounds reduced amount is adjusted for the percentage of the facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.

1. Starting in FY 2016, EPA combined reductions in hazardous waste and non-hazardous waste into one measure. Totals for FY 2012 – 2015 are for hazardous waste reductions only.

1. Starting in FY 2018, the Agency is reporting contaminated soil and water cleanup from all cases, not just from CERCLA and RCRA Corrective Action cases as in past years.
2. The VCMA is reported the year in which the enforcement action that initially required the cleanup is issued or entered. If a unilateral administrative order (UAO) is followed by a judicial consent decree that requires the same cleanup (i.e., the respondent did not comply with the UAO), the same VCMA is not counted again.

1. Totals include “allowed claims” under bankruptcy settlements.
2. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.

1. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
2. Dollar figures referenced in the bullets are not adjusted to reflect inflation/deflation.

1. In FY 2020, the criminal program began using a new criminal case reporting system which also tracks outcomes. The system captured additional home detention – FY 2020 = 4 years; FY 2021= 6 years; and FY 2022 = 4 years.

1. The orange dotted line is a linear trendline which shows the counts of Defendants Charged decreased at a steady rate.
2. We anticipate as hiring and appropriate resource allocation are approved, the criminal enforcement program evolve, producing commensurate results, continuing to prioritize the most egregious violators of environmental crime.

1. The orange dotted line is a linear trendline which shows the counts of Number of Special Agents decreased at a steady rate.
2. We anticipate as hiring and appropriate resource allocation are approved, the criminal enforcement program evolve, producing commensurate results, continuing to prioritize the most egregious violators of environmental crime.

1. VD stands for Voluntary Disclosure.

1. A single settlement can have multiple SEPs.
2. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2022 dollars based on the monthly rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.