C f
United States Office of January 1983 r'
Environmental Protection Water (WH-556)
Agency Washington DC 20460 832B83105
v>EPA Operator Training Programs
-------
REPORT ON
EPA OPERATOR TRAINING PROGRAMS
January 1983
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During the past 15 years several Federal programs have been initiated to train personnel for
the proper operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment plant facilities. This report
was developed to provide a broad overview of past and present Federal training programs. The
contents of this report provide a review of Federal operator training programs since the late
1960's; the current status of Environmental Protection Agency support for operator training
programs; and the current framework for administering a limited Federal support program.
A summary of the facts discussed in this report includes:
1. Planning for operator training programs began in 1967. Initial efforts to develop
programs capable of training large numbers of personnel for operating and main-
taining Municipal wastewater treatment facilities utilized existing Federal authori-
ties—primarily the Manpower Development and Training Act.
2. During the past 15 years, training needs, funding levels and policy directions
shifted. From 1967-1971 Federal agencies focused on developing training programs
across the U.S. From 1971-1977 emphasis was placed on operating these training
programs. During the period 1977-1980 individual states began to become self-
sufficient in the area of operator training. In 1980, and continuing at the present
time, the Federal Government is phasing out its role in operator training. As a result,
training program emphasis progressed through various phases of training operators;
training instructors; developing training materials; providing support to non-govern-
mental organizations involved in operator training activities; and developing State
self-sufficiency for operator training.
3. After 15 years of existence, Federal progam activities invested approximately $36.6
million in grant and contract funds for operator training. These funds were used to
train between 15,000 and 20,000 persons; develop a variety of curricula and instruc-
tional materials; and support a number of other related projects.
4. Section 109 (b), enacted as part of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972, authorized the use of construction grant funds for providing operator
training facilities within a state. This program was implemented to encourage and
promote State self-sufficiency in conducting operator training programs.
5. During the past five years EPA developed programs and institutions which encour-
aged State self-sufficiency in the area of operator training. Emphasis was placed
on supporting related organizations and on-going training programs so they could
continue with minimum or no Federal funding.
6. In recent years, increased emphasis was placed on developing high quality training
materials for use by trainers to satisfy a variety of needs. This activity was a means
to efficiently use limited resources to develop quality materials that did not pre-
viously exist.
7. A key factor in promoting State self-sufficiency was support of non-governmental
organizations that were important in the field of operator training. Support was given
-------
to States, the Associated Boards of Certification (ABC), the Joint Training Coordi-
nating Committee (JTCC), the National Environmental Trainers Association (NETA),
the Instructional Resources Center (IRC), the National Trainers Institute (NTI), the
National Demonstration Water Project (NDWP), and the American Clean Water
Association (ACWA).
8. The current EPA operator training program is almost entirely dedicated to the
support of State operator training programs. The intent of this effort is to utilize oper-
ator training resources as a means to help solve noncompliance problems at small
municipal wastewater treatment facilities.
9. EPA encourages State (and local) responsibility for providing adequate training pro-
grams, which will produce the qualified personnel needed to operate current and
future wastewater treatment facilities. The Agency believes that past efforts to estab-
lish State self-sufficiency have provided the basis for an accelerated transition of
overall training program management and funding responsibility to States.
10. Operator training funds, added by Congress to the Agency's budgets, are being
channeled primarily to ongoing State training efforts through State training centers or
State agencies.
IV
-------
INTRODUCTION
Federal water pollution control programs have spawned a variety of related training activities
throughout the years. The earliest involvement of the Federal Government in a direct training
activity was in the mid-1950's, when the U.S. Public Health Service conducted training
courses at the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center in Cincinnati. The primary objective
of these first training activities was to provide technical training for personnel of public
agencies and others with suitable qualifications. An expansion of Federal water pollution
control programs, following enactment of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956,
stimulated growth in university academic programs throughout the country. This growth in
academic programs was based to a large extent on Federal research funds. Most of these
programs were directed toward research in the field of water pollution control, and provided
opportunities for the training of graduate engineers.
Institutionalized training programs for operators of wastewater treatment facilities were
almost nonexistent in these early years. Most of the needed training was accomplished
through on-the-job training by existing plant operating staff, and through short-course
activities sponsored by operator associations, professional organizations, and State agencies.
Although much of this training was very good, there was simply not enough of it to meet the
growing demand. Additionally, there was almost a total lack of programs designed for
individuals beginning a career in the operations field.
Growing Federal financial support for the construction of wastewater treatment facilities
during the 1960's resulted in an increased need for additional and more highly trained operator
personnel. Congress took note of this in its water pollution control legislation in 1966, and by
the late 1960/8 programs had been established in the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration (FWPCA) to initiate new manpower development and training activities. Since
that time, a variety of programs have been introduced and phased out.
This report has been developed to review the course of Federal manpower development and
training programs since the late 196ffs, and to provide a current perspective for developing
Agency policies and activities. The report addresses only those programs involved with the
training of personnel in the operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment facilities.
This report is not intended as a comprehensive survey of all past and current operator training
programs, but only those supported by Federal funding. Many otiier programs have been
developed and expanded during the past 15 years and draw their support from a variety of
other sources. It is believed that this non-EPA support is the real base upon which future
programs will be built.
The intent of this report is to:
1) provide a basis for understanding EPA's historical and present approach to operator
training
2) provide an understanding of the current framework for administering the phaseout of
the Federal support program
3) provide Congress with an understanding of the background for EPA policy on
phaseout of Federally assisted training
-------
4) provide information to other organizations which are concerned with facilitating
State and local training efforts
EPA's operator training program has been in existence for about fifteen years. This report will
review the legislative basis and history of the program; the directions, activities, and scope of
the program from 1967 to 1982; some of the major factors that influenced the direction of the
program; and the current status and accomplishments of all of these efforts. The report is not
intended to provide a detailed, in-depth analysis of all of the many activities that took place
during this time period, but to identify the major milestones, directions, and operating levels.
This overview will thus provide a general understanding of past EPA training activities and
present EPA policies.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
The basis for the operator training programs that have been conducted by EPA and its pre-
decessor agencies is found in the enabling legislation for the Federal water pollution control
program. This part of the report reviews the Federal legislation and identifies those sections
that have been utilized for operator training programs. In addition, EPA has used some
external programs authorized by other Federal legislation, and these will be identified also.
The first legislative language dealing with training appeared in the Water Pollution Control Act
of 1956. Section 4 of this Act authorized grant awards, contracts, research fellowships and
technical training for public agency and other personnel. Implementation of this section
marked the beginning of support for academic research and training activities, and the
presentation of direct training courses in Cincinnati.
Recognition of the need for additional manpower, to successfully implement national water
pollution control programs, was reflected in The Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 (PL 89-
753). Section 16 of that Act called for a study. This study was to determine the need for
additional trained State and local personnel to carry out the programs under the Act, and to
determine means to use existing Federal training programs to meet this need. A report was to
be made to Congress by July 1, 1967. As a result of Senate deliberations before the passage of
this Act, the Senate Committee report (July 11,1966) raised and discussed the issue of trained
operations personnel. More short-term and long-term operator training programs were called
for. The committee suggested a report to Congress on the question of skilled manpower
needs for operation and maintenance, recommended that a national conference be held, and
suggested that the Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare get more
involved in this matter.
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 (PL -91-224) addressed the need for assuring an
adequate supply of trained personnel, to implement the national water pollution control effort
that was getting underway. The 1970 legislation authorized programs to address manpower
planning, development and training needs for all levels and categories of personnel involved in
the total span of pollution abatement and control activities. Section 5 (previously Section 4) of
the basic Act was retained and expanded to authorize the financing of pilot programs for
manpower development and training of persons in the field of operation.and maintenance.
This authorization established the basic operator training program administered by EPA. (The
-------
section that established this program was redesignated as 104(g)(1) in the 1972 legislation,
and has been commonly identified as the "104(g)(1) operator training program".)
Section 5 of the 1970 Act also directed the development and maintenance of a manpower
forecasting system. This system related to all occupations needed for the prevention, control,
and abatement of water pollution. Section 5 further requested that a report be submitted to
Congress within 18 months concerning the implementation of manpower development and
training programs established under Section 5. The 1970 Act further added Sections 16,17,18
and 19, which established support programs for undergraduate curriculums in the design,
operation, and maintenance of wastewater treatment works.
With enactment of the 1970 Act, a broad legislative base existed for implementing Federally
supported training programs. Section 5(g)(1) supported a variety of vocational-type training
activities at the operator level, while Sections 16-19 supported the development of
undergraduate programs related to plant operations.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of the 1972 (PL 92-500) retained all of
the training-related sections of the 1970 Act, but redesignated them. Section 5(g) became
Section 104(g), and Sections 16, 17, 18 and 19 became sections 109(a), 110, 111 and 112,
respectively. A new section, 109(b), was added which permitted the use of up to $250,000, of
each State's construction grant allocation, to construct a facility for training wastewater
treatment facility operators in that State. These were 100% grants and did not require any
matching funds.
The Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217) retained all of the previous training-related sections
of the Act. However, it modified Section 109(b), the state training center program, to permit
the use of grant funds for other State training program costs such as mobile training units,
classroom rentals, specialized instructors and instructional materials. The modifications also
increased the amount of construction grant funds that could be used under Section 109(b)
from $250,000 to $500,000.
There have been no changes in the content of the training related sections of the Federal
legislation since 1977. Key milestones of Federal legislation related to training are shown in
Table 1.
Two other pieces of Federal legislation also proved to be important in conducting operator
training programs. The Manpower Development and Training Act (PL 87-415, as amended)
and the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (PL 93-203) provided training and
employment authorities as well as funding. Both were utilized in the early development of
operator training programs.
-------
TABLE 1. LEGISLATIVE MILESTONES
1956 Water Pollution Control Act of 1956 (PL 84-660)
Section 4 established authority for grants for research and training projects, re-
search fellowships, and training programs.
1966 Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 (PL 89-753)
Section 16 called for a study on manpower and training needs to implement water
pollution control programs, with a report to Congress by July 1, 1967.
1970 Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 (PL 91-224)
Section 5 provided authority for pilot programs of manpower development and
training of persons in the operation and maintenance of treatment works, estab-
lished a manpower forecasting system, and requested a report to Congress.
Sections 16 through 19 provided for support to institutions of higher education for
undergraduate programs in the design, operation, and maintenance of treatment
works; and for scholarships for undergraduate training.
1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500)
Section 109(b) established state training center program, using up to $250,000 in
contruction grant funds per State.
1977 Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217)
Section 109(b) modified to expand state training center authorizations.
THE FIRST DECADE-1967 TO 1976
Background
The Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 (PL 89-753) called for a study to determine the
amount of additional manpower needed to implement programs mandated by the Act. This
study focused on State and local personnel requirements and the possibility of utilizing
existing Federal programs to train needed personnel. Although this study was to address all
levels of personnel, special emphasis was given to manpower requirements for operating
wastewater treatment facilties.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Admfnistration (FWPCA) reported the study's findings to
Congress August 2,1967. This study determined, relative to manpower and training needs for
wastewater treatment personnel:
-------
a) An additional 30,000 trained operators for municipal treatment facilities would be
needed by 1972.
b) The availability of training activities, through institutional programs and short course
offerings, was inadequate to meet the current requirements, and was destined to
become worse due to the growing demand for trained operators.
c) The problems of maintaining an adequate, trained operations workforce are com-
pounded by problems of recruitment, retention and utilization. Typical problems
cited include low salaries, a low level of prestige and acceptance in the community,
inadequate licensing programs, and poor utilization of automation to reduce man-
power needs and skill levels.
The FWPCA concluded its report by identifying an action plan to respond to these major
problem areas. Key actions related to operator training programs included the following:
1) Initiate training and facilities grants to technical/vocational schools and junior col-
leges for training operators and developing related training programs.
2) Explore and develop interagency agreements to utilize manpower development and
training programs managed under other agencies' authorities.
3) Development activities to promote the strengthening of State operator licensing
programs.
Program Development and Implementation
As a result of this study, an Office of Manpower and Training was established within FWPCA in
1967. This office immediately began to develop new activities based on a broader use of
existing Agency legislative authority. It also began to develop interagency agreements to
utilize other agencies' manpower development and training authorities. Priority emphasis was
placed on developing agreements with the Departments of Labor and Health, Education and
Welfare to utilize the broad authority and programs of the Manpower Development and
Training Act (MDTA). The objectives of these initial efforts were to:
1) Develop and implement training programs for entry level and upgrade training to
meet the increasing need for operators during the next five years.
2) Develop curriculum guides and materials to support the establishment of new train-
ing programs and the training of operations personnel.
3) Support the development of institutionalized training programs at technical/voca-
tional schools and community colleges for operations personnel.
New program activities began in earnest during FY 68, especially with the negotiation of
interagency agreements and the development of programs to use existing legislative authority
(Section 5). An initial interagency agreement was developed that allowed the FWPCA to
become a participant in the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System (CAMPS). This
-------
MDTA program was then used to channel $1,162,000 in FY 69 into training programs for 980
persons. These training funds were made available through the CAMPS program to State
water pollution control agencies in 15 States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. The
CAMPS training was essentially on-the-job training where an instructor was hired to train
personnel at wastewater treatment facilities. In FY 69 the Section 5grant authority was used to
award grants totalling $122,000 for the development of operator training materials and
curriculum guides.
In FY 70, the CAMPS training program was continued. The on-the-job training was
supplemented by efforts to develop training programs at educational institutions for entry
level and upgrade training in the area of plant operations. Institutions involved were primarily
technical/vocational schools and community colleges. In FY 70, the State training activities
under the CAMPS program trained about 2,900 operators in 25 States at an estimated cost of $3
million. A Section 5 grant of $35,000 continued needed curriculum development work.
FY 71 saw the fullest development of the MDTA program capabilities, both in terms of funding
level and training activities. This year was also the first year of new agency authorities under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (PL 91-224), and full use was also made of these
capabilities. The MDTA programs included the following:
1) Coupled On-the-Job Training—This program offered entry level and upgrade
operator training for unemployed and underemployed persons in wastewater treat-
ment plants through combined classroom and on-the-job training activities.
2) Institutional Training—This program helped support the establishment of entry
level operator training programs at several technical/vocational schools and com-
munity colleges around the country. The typical training program included 440 hours
classroom instruction and 440 hours of the hands-on training in a treatment plant.
3) Public Service Careers (PSC)—This program relied upon several sponsoring
agencies to work with treatment facilities to find and develop employment vacancies
for the placement of disadvantaged persons. Persons placed in such vacancies were
also provided with training and supportive services to assist them in becoming
competent employees.
4) Transition Training—In this program, agreements were developed between training
institutions and military bases to provide entry-level operator training for military
personnel who were leaving the service. Basic classroom and on-the-job training
were provided, as well as assistance in locating employment opportunities in water
pollution control facilities.
These MDTA programs invested a total of about $4,165,000 during FY 71 in training about
2,800 persons. In addition, the Agency utilized the authority and funding of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act to supplement other on-going training activities. This was
the first year of expanded programs under Section 5(g). Under Section 5(g)(1), about
$957,000 in grant funds were used to support instructor training activities, operator training in
advanced wastewater treatment, and State sponsored operator training activities. About
$54,000 was used under Section 5(g)(3) for curriculum development in operator training
-------
programs. Approximately $331,000 was used under Section 16 to establish undergraduate
programs related to plant operations, and to train students at seven institutions of higher
education. The total of all funds committed during FY 71 for support of training programs,
related to the operation of treatment facilities, was about $5.5 million.
FY 72 saw a decline in the level of funding for MDTA training programs, but all four elements of
the effort, as described above, were continued. The Agency's own funding levels and program
directions were approximately the same as in the previous year. This was also the last year in
which funds were provided for the PSC and Institutional Training programs.
The funding level of the MDTA programs was again reduced in FY 73, and only the OJT and
Transition Training programs remained from the original activities. An additional activity was
initiated, under the Work Incentive Program (WIN), to provide remedial education and skill
training for adult welfare recipients. Agency programs continued at the same funding level.
A significant event during FY 73 was passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972. This legislation provided $250,000 per State in wastewater treatment
facility construction grant funds. These funds were ear-marked for constructing a facility for
treatment plant operator training. These were 100% grants that did not require any matching
funds. Efforts began immediately to develop the guidelines and regulations that would allow
States to use these grant funds to expand their capabilities to assume the responsibility for
comprehensive training programs.
Funding for MDTA programs actually increased slightly in FY 74, but the total program effort
and activities were about the same as in the previous year. FY 74 was the last year in which
MDTA funds were available to initiate new operator training projects. Although new funding
was not available, training under previously negotiated projects, funded in prior years,
continued on into FY 75 and FY 76. Agency funded programs continued at a stable level of
about $1.1 million from FY 74 through FY 77.
A summary of funding levels for operator training programs during this ten year period is
shown in Figure 1.
Program Overview and Accomplishments
This ten year period was characterized by rapid growth in program activities and funding
levels. The program directions and activities were guided by the FWPCA report to Congress in
1967. The early priorities of the program were to provide training for large numbers of persons
in order to meet a growing need for certified treatment facility operators. As funding levels
decreased and training programs became well established in many parts of the country, the
Agency's priorities began to shift. EPA began to focus more support toward programs that
would contribute to improvement in the quality, consistency, and timeliness of independent
training efforts. Although Federal funds were still being used to provide training to meet acute
and special needs, a larger percentage of the available funds were being used to develop
training support systems, training curricula and materials, instructor training activities, and to
meet training program improvement needs.
-------
50-
O
a
30-
20-
EPA Funding
MDTA Funding
FY69 FY70 FY71 FY 72 FY 73 FY 74 FY 75 FY76 FY 77
Figure 1. Funding Levels For Operator Training
As an example of this shift in priorities, support was given to initiate activity in three important
areas. Supported by EPA grants, the Association of Boards of Certification for Operating
Personnel in Water and Wastewater Utilities (ABC) was formed in 1972 and began work to
improve operator certification programs in States throughout the country. Support was also
given to establish another organization in 1977, the Joint Training Coordination Committee
(JTCC), to begin promoting and assisting more effective coordination of operator training
activities at the State level. The Instructional Resources Information system, (IRIS), a
computerized information storage and retrieval system, was developed in 1975 for the use of
trainers and training institutions.
Many significant events occurred during this period related to legislative changes and
program activities that affected the course of Federal efforts to support operator training.
These events are summarized in Table 2.
From FY 69 through FY 77, approximately $24.6 million of extramural funds were obligated by
the Federal Government. About 64% came from the MDTA program and about 36% from EPA
programs. Because of the diversity of training programs, it is difficult to find an accurate
record of the number of persons trained. However, the number of persons trained is estimated
to be in excess of 13,000. In addition, other significant products resulted from these efforts,
many of which are still of importance in the planning and conducting of current operator
training programs. Examples of such products can be grouped as follows:
-------
1) Curriculum Guides
• Criteria for Establishment and Maintenance of Two-Year Wastewater Post High
School Wastewater Technology Progams (CEWT)
• A Two-Year Water Quality Monitoring Curriculum
• Curriculum Guide—A Four-Year Wastewater Technology Program
2) Instructional Materials
Sacramento State University correspondence course for plant operations
Michigan State correspondence course for entry-level managers
Instructional technology courses
NPDES effluent monitoring procedures courses
Standard Operating Job Procedures (SOJP) for process unit operations
Troubleshooting Operation and Maintenance Problems in Municipal Wastewater
Treatment Facilties
3) Institutional Support
• State Training Centers through Section 109(b)
• Association of Boards of Certification for Operating Personnel in Water and
Wastewater Utilities
• Joint Training Coordinating Committee
• Instructional Resources Information System
• Several training programs at educational institutions
These training efforts were administered by the FWPCA and then the EPA through a variety of
means. The funding from MDTA was transferred to the Agency by means of interagency
agreements. Most of these funds were then utilized through means of national contracts
negotiated by the headquarters office or through grants awarded directly to sponsoring
organizations. Regional office staffs grew significantly during this time period. They played
a major role in establishing programs, recruiting students, placing training program graduates
and monitoring the performance of the training activities. The Regional Office staffs were
particularly active in working, with State training programs and educational institutions, to
develop and implement activities supported by the Agency's own training grant authorities
and funding.
Early in this same time period, there was also a significant growth in direct training courses
presented by the Agency, both at the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center in
Cincinnati, and in several newly established regional laboratories. The number of courses
offered was greatest in the early 1970's, and then began to decline in number as program
funding levels decreased. Although many of these courses, particularly those related to the
conduct of laboratory analyses, were of value to operators, they were never a significant part
of the nation's total operator training effort.
-------
TABLE 2. MILESTONES: 1967 TO 1977
1967 Report to Congress on manpower and training needs
1968 Interagency agreement negotiated to participate in CAMPS program to train
operators
Section 5 used to start development of curricula materials
1970 Full use made of MDTA program through On-The-Job Training, Institutional Train-
ing, Public Service Career Programs, and Transition Training
First year for expanded Section 5 program.
1971 Start in decline in MDTA funding
1972 MDTA program cutback to OJT and Transition Training. WIN program added
Section 109(b) enacted to support establishment of State Training Centers
Associated Boards of Certification (ABC) formed
1974 Last year for MDTA funding
1975 Grant program limited to section 104(g)(1) funding authority
Instructional Resources Information System (IRIS) established
1977 Joint Training Coordinating Committee (JTCC) Formed
THE PERIOD 1977-1982
Background
EPA refocused the priorities and direction of operator training programs during the period
1977 to 1982. This redirection was based upon experience gained in conducting the large
operator training efforts that began in the late 1960's; knowledge gained from a number of
studies conducted in the early 1970's; and a shift in policy regarding the Agency's role in train-
ing and assistance activities.
Following the formation of EPA in 1970, there was a gradual change in Agency policy for assist-
ing municipalities to comply with discharge permit requirements. This policy change was
reflected in Agency programs related to technical and training assistance for States and
municipalities. The Agency's policy was to rely upon the private sector for technical assistance
to municipalities, to support the concept of assisting states and educational institutions to
achieve self-sufficiency in their operator training programs, and to increase emphasis on
Agency and State enforcement of discharge permit requirements. In 1977, amendments to the
Clean Water Act recognized primary State responsibility for management of the construction
grants program and provided for delegation of essentially all activities, including training, to
eligible States.
10
-------
Other agencies, besides EPA, also began to wind down operator training programs. Funding
through the Manpower Development and Training Act (MDTA) was eliminated after FY 74.
Funding through the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) was also reduced
as that program's funding decreased. The initiation of new and continued training activities by
EPA then became totally dependent upon funding available through the Section 104(g)(1)
authority of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. As a result, program operating budgets
and activity levels declined during this time period.
The shifting of EPA policy resulted in organizational changes to consolidate the program's
management. In 1976, two organizational units located in Cincinnati, one responsible for the
Agency's water quality direct training function and the other involved with field assistance on
plant operational problems, were combined to form the National Training and Operational
Technology Center (NTOTC). Beginning in 1977, many of the operator training program
responsibilities were shifted to NTOTC from the Washington, D.C. Headquarters Office. In
1979 the total management responsibility for the operator training program was assigned to
NTOTC. The Washington training office was reduced to a small liaison staff. Following the
continuing Agency policy to reduce EPA's direct involvement in training activities, the
NTOTC offices were closed on September 30, 1981.
Program Directions
To support achievement of State self-sufficiency, EPA utilized the experience, materials and
activities which were generated during the first ten years of the program. Emphasis was
placed on implementing those activities that would result in institutionalizing key elements of
on-going training programs, and thereby provide a base of operations and support that could
continue with minimal or no Federal funding. The overall impact of this new direction was a
decrease in direct training of operations personnel and an increase in the development of
State training program support systems.
EPA's program efforts were directed into three main areas: the support of activities to
establish and improve State operator training programs; support activities directly operated
by NTOTC; and support to other organizations that had direct involvement in or impact on
operator training programs. The interrelation of these three areas, and the component parts of
each, are illustrated in Figure 2. These areas of activity are described in the following
paragraphs.
State Program Support
Support of State operator training programs took place through two primary means. Section
109(b) of the Clean Water Act authorized a State to utilize up to $500,000 of its construction
grant allocation to construct a facility for training of treatment plant operators. (At first the
authorization was only for $250,000. This was increased to $500,000 in 1977.) The States have
utilized this funding in a variety of different ways, and to date 20 States and the District of
Columbia have taken advantage of this program. Another 16 States are in various stages of
interest and consideration of utilizing 109(b) funds for State training facilities. A listing of
States that have utilized 109(b) funding and information on each State's program is shown in
Table 3.
11
-------
STATE
PROGRAM
SUPPORT
109(b) Support,
Program Development
Instructional Support
IRIS
Develop New
Materials \,nstructlona|
Collect Easting/ Materials
Materials Lending
Library
IRC
"Bulletin"
INSTRUCTIONAL
CENTER
Information
&
Assistance
J^eTI
*J Users 1
STATE
PROGRAMS
&
MAINTENANCE
PERSONNEL
Technical and Training Assistance
OTHER
ORGANIZATIONAL
SUPPORT
ABC, JTCC. NETA, NDWP
Figure 2. Interrelation of EPA Operator Training Activities
TABLE 3. SECTION 109(b) STATE TRAINING CENTERS
State
Arkansas
Colorado
District of
Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Iowa
Name of Institution
Southern Arkansas University
Technical Branch
Location
East Camden, AR.
Department of Environmental
Services
The University of Florida;
TREEO Center
Washington, D.C.
Gainesville, FL
West Georgia College—Georgia Carrollton, GA.
Water and Wastewater Institute
Boise State University—
Wastewater Training Center
Boise, ID
Kirkwood Community College— Cedar Rapids, IA
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Operator Training Center
Funding
$500,000
Community College of Denver Denver, Colorado $500,000
Status
Operational-
Additional con-
struction to be
complete in 6/83
Start construc-
struction 12/82;
Complete in
10/83.
$249.000 Operational
$250,000 Operational
$500,000 Operational
$500,000 Operational in
1/83
$500,000 Operational
12
-------
TABLE 3. SECTION 109(b) STATE TRAINING CENTERS (cont.)
State
Kansas
Maine
Maryland
Name of Institution
Location
Funding Status
Kansas Environmental Training Topeka, KN
System—Kansas State Depart-
ment of Health and Environment
New England Regional
Wastewater Institute
Charles County Community
College—Maryland State
Training Center
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Control
So. Portland, ME
La Plata, MD
Boston, MA
$500,000
$320,000
$500,000
$500,000
Missouri Crowder College—Water and Neosho, MO
Wastewater Technology Division
New Hampshire New Hampshire Water Supply & Concord, NH
Pollution Control Commission
New Jersey
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
Wyoming
Rutgers University—
Cook College
New Mexico State University-
Occupational Education Branch
Oscar Rose Junior College
Utah Technical College
Vermont Technical College
Virginia Operator Training
Center—J. Sargeant Reynolds
Community College
New Brunswick, NJ
Las Cruces, NM
Midwest City, OK
Orem, UT
Randolph, VT
Richmond, VA
Green River Community College Auburn, WA
Washington Environmental
Training Resources Center
Casper College—State Casper, WY
Wastewater Training Center
Just starting
operation
Facility under
construction
Start construc-
tion 12/827 Com-
pletion in 6/84
State agency re-
evaluating entire
project
$250,000
$340,000
$500,000
$500,000
$250,000
$500,000
$163,000
Operational
Operational
Operational
Operational
Operational
Operational
Contract trai
project
completed
$250,000 Operational
$500,000 Operational
$500,000 Operational
The Agency also used Section 104(g)(1) grant funds to support the development of training
programs within a State. These projects were generally designed to initiate new training
programs, such as one-year certificate programs within an educational institution, or to
support the expansion or improvement of existing on-site assistance and classroom training
programs. The majority of these grants were awarded through EPA's Regional offices.
13
-------
NTOTC Program Support
Support programs operated directly by NTOTC included the establishment and management
of an Instructional Resources Center (IRC), the development of instructional materials, the
provision of instructional support to trainers and training institutions, and the provision of
technical and training assistance. The Instructional Recources Center was designed as an
information management and dissemination system to support the needs of water quality
trainers and training institutions. The basis of the IRC is a computerized data system known
as the Instructional Resources Information System (IRIS), which was developed in the mid-
1970's. IRIS provides an information cataloging and retrieval capability that lists several
thousand instructional resources (textbooks, training courses, audio-visual materials, etc.)
related to water quality. Other components of the IRC includea lending library of water quality
instructional materials (audio-visual materials and packaged training courses), a newsletter
known as the IRC "Bulletin", and a training program assistance capability. The IRC also
currently serves as a repository for all EPA developed training materials and all materials listed
in IRIS. Thus, all trainers and training institutions have access to these materials for review
prior to acquisition or for use in designing training courses and programs.
EPA placed emphasis on development of high quality, accurate training materials that could
be used by trainers to satisfy a variety of training needs. These materials were developed to fill
gaps in the existing array of available materials and to improve training in areas of high priority
need. Because the development of such materials is generally very costly, this activity was
seen as a means to utilize limited resources to meet the needs of many different individuals
and institutions. The IRC capability was then used to disseminate information on the avail-
abilty of such materials and to distribute them to the ultimate users.
Instructional support was provided by the staff of NTOTC to trainers and training institutions to
promote the improvement of instructional programs and activities. In some instances,
individualized assistance was given to help design a training course or program, orto provide
instructional support as a means of improving the capability of the institution to continue the
program on their own in future offerings. More frequently, instructional support was given
through a series of "instructor workshops" where trainers were given an opportunity to
improve their instructional skills and become more familiar with available resources, such as
the IRC, that they could use to improve their own training programs. Other efforts in this area
included a series of "instructional technology" training courses that were offered across the
country as part of the field testing of a packaged course on instructional technology. An
attempt was also made to test the concept of a National Trainers Institute (NTI) that would
provide training to water quality instructors in both technical and instructional skills. If the
concept of an NTI proved feasible, it was hoped that it could become self-supporting and a
long term resource for trainers.
Finally, NTOTC staff expertise was available to States and training institutions to provide
technical and training assistance in the areas of plant operations and operator training.
14
-------
Support of Other Organizations
The third area of EPA support was to other organizations that had direct involvement in, or
impact on, operator training programs. The availabilty of Section 104(g)(1) grant funds played
a significant role in the establishment and accomplishments of two organizations. One was
the Association of Boards of Certification for Operating Personnel in Water and Wastewater
Utilities. This organization, known as ABC, is comprised of individual certification boards in
each State, and is primarily concerned with the certification of operations personnel.
Another organization that received significant EPA support was the Joint Training Coordi-
nating Committee. JTCC is comprised of representatives of the Water Pollution Control
Federation; the American Water Works Association; the Association of Boards of Certi-
fication; the Federation of Associations on the Canadian Environment; the National
Environmental Training Association; and the American Public Works Association. JTCC was
established to promote the coordination of training efforts on a national basis and the
establishment of State-level training coordinating committees. JTCC has produced a
handbook that serves as a guide for organizing and implementing State committees; lists
State contacts for operator certification and training; and provides methodology for
evaluating operator training materials.
Another organization that was independently formed is the National Environmental Training
Association (NETA). This organization is comprised of environmental trainers and works to
support the needs of its members in improving and expanding needed training programs.
Since inception, NETA has received EPA grant funds to provide useful information and
activities related to operator training. They have completed a survey and compilation of
sources of training and trainers; provided a clearinghouse function to coordinate training
activities within two EPA regions; and conducted national conferences for member trainers.
Program Support Levels
During this time period, the continuation of EPA's operator training program was dependent for
the most part on the authority and funding through Section 104(g)(1). Although a small
amount of funding from Section 104(g)(3) was available to assist in supporting some
curriculum projects, the majority of financial support came from the 104(g)(1) program. As in
the years just prior to this time period, appropriations for Section 104(g)(1) continued at a
level of $1.1 million during FY78. In FY 79, there was an increase in available Section 104(g)(1)
funds to a level of $3.332 million. Funding levels for FY 80and FY81 were $2.448 million and
$1.267 million, respectively. In FY 82, following the closing of NTOTC, Congress provided
additional funds to the Agency's appropriation to support operator training programs. Of
these funds, $3.868 million were available for extramural programs.
These funds were regularly divided between Headquarters managed "National impact
projects" and regionally managed projects. Although many of the regional projects did
support the concept of achieving a basis for self-support, many continued to meet a need for
training operators in basic and upgrade skills.
Following the termination of MDTA funding for operatortraining in 1974, attempts were made
to find other financial support programs. In 1978, an interagency agreement was signed with
15
-------
the Department of Labor to encourage the use of the Comprehensive Employment and
Training Act (CETA) to assist in training and employing persons in the wastewater facility
operation field. A workshop was sponsored by EPA to help State and local agencies become
familiar with, and make full use of, CETA programs. Where possible, EPA provided assistance,
primarily through the Regional offices, to States interested in developing CETA programs. This
program enabled the training of many personnel in the wastewater field, although its total
impact is not known. CETA funding decreased shortly after this program's inception, and EPA
resources to work on the program also decreased.
A summary of funding levels during this period of time is shown in Figure 3.
50-
40-
O
O
20 -
10 -
FY78
FY79
FY80
FY81
FY 82
FY 83
Figure 3. EPA Funding Levels For Operator Training
Program Accomplishments
During this five year period, progress was made in refocusing efforts within the three main
program areas described earlier. Examples in each area include the following:
1) State Program Support
• 109(b) State Training Centers—Guidelines for funding eligibility were broad-
ened, more direct assistance was given, and 15 grants for new centers were
approved.
• Program refinements at several institutions were supported. An example is the
start of a new one-year certificate program at the Southern Illinois University
Environmental Resources Training Center.
16
-------
2) Instructional Materials Development
• Refined and packaged the course on "Troubleshooting Operation and Mainte-
nance Problems at Wastewater Treatment Plants"
• Developed packaged course on "Organic Analyses in Water Quality Control
Programs"
• Developed packaged course on "Inorganic Analyses in Water Quality Control
Programs"
• Refined and packaged training course on "Instructional Technology"
• Developed packaged training course on "Sludge Treatment and Disposal"
• Developed packaged training course on "Operational Considerations in Waste-
water Treatment Plant Design"
• Developed packaged training course on "Management of Muncipal Wastewater
Treatment Facilties"
• Developed packaged training course on "Wastewater Facility Maintenance
Management"
3) Organizational Support
• Promoted the development of plans and provided financial support that would
lead to self-sufficiency for ABC, JTCC, NETA, the IRC program at Ohio State
University, and the National Trainers Institute at Battelle Memorial Institute.
CURRENT PROGRAM STATUS AND EVALUATION
Current Status
EPA's hedquarters in Washington, D.C. now handles the monitoring and administrative tasks
related to on-going grant projects, and responds to current program management needs. This
Agency office is working with the States to utilize the $3,868,000 that Congress added-on to
the Agency's FY 82 budget, and the $2,625,200 added to the FY83 budget, for the purpose of
supporting operator training.
These funds are being funneled into State level training programs which focus on assisting
operators of small treatment facilities to meet their performance requirements. Specifically,
the funds will be used to provide for on-site plant evaluations in small noncomplying facilities,
and on-site, over-the-shoulder training and technical assistance to correct operational
problems. The total FY 82 grant funding was divided in the following way.
1) $2,026,000 for grants to 20 State Training Centers established under Section 109(b).
2) $1,200,000 divided equally among EPA's ten Regional Offices, for similar projects
in States that do not have 109(b) centers.
3) $575,000 grant for the National Water Demonstration Project to conduct a similar,
highly-intensive, effort in four to six other States. This project is a coordinated effort
that also involves the National Environmental Training Association and the American
Clean Water Association.
17
-------
An additional $67,000 grant was awarded to the Association of State and Interstate Water
Pollution Control Administrators to conduct a survey of current State operator training
progams. The findings of this study, in conjunction with the results of the other on-site
training projects, will provide information for evaluating the operator training situation, and
determining future program policies and directions.
All of these projects have evaluation steps and intermediate reporting requirements that will
allow EPA to measure the effectiveness of this approach. Because the funding became
available to the Agency late in the fiscal year, actual projects activity, under most grants,
began in October 1982. Conclusive results are not expected until late 1983. Essentially all FY
83 funds are expected to be allocated to States to continue and expand efforts begun in 1982.
Program Evaluation
The objectives of EPA's operator training program progressed throughout the total life of the
program. A primary objective in the early years was to meet a rapidly growing demand for
trained operators. A variety of manpower training and employment programs were
successfully used to meet this demand. At least 15,000 persons were trained in the field of
plant operations between the years of 1969 and 1977. In addition, there was a great amount of
support given to the development of training curricula and materials, and the establishment of
training institutions and other support organizations that contributed to improving the
development and implementation of training programs.
Significant outputs from the early period of the national operator training effort included the
following:
• The development of a two-year technician training curriculum
• The development of a two-year water quality monitoring technician training curriculum
• The development of a basic level operator training correspondence course
• The development of an instructional technology training program that is now available
in packaged form
• The development of the Instructional Resources Information System, a computerized
information storage and retrieval system for water quality instructional materials
• Asistance in the formation and support of the Association of Boards of Certification,
which has developed a broad program for establishing and operating state
certification programs
• Assistance in the formation and support of the Joint Training and Coordinating
Committee, which has developed guidance for promoting more effective, well-
coordinated training programs on a State-wide basis
During the past five years, the EPA established programs and institutions based on the
premise that future self-sufficiency was a highly desirable characteristic. A variety of different
program activities were undertaken as outlined in the previous section. The status and
progress of the most significant of these activities is outlined below:
• The development of operator training instructional materials. The emphasis was
placed on high priority areas such as process control, troubleshooting, sludge treat-
18
-------
ment, and facility management. A total of 16 packaged courses were initiated or
completed. Almost all are now complete and available for use.
The Instructional Resources Center (IRC). The number of instructional materials now
contained in the IRC software package (IRIS) has grown more than 7,000data units.
Requests for assistance on obtaining materials and other training related informa-
tion have averaged more than 2,000 per year, and the IRC "Bulletin" had reached a
distribution of more than 10,000. The IRC is now in a period of declining Federal
support with actions underway to develop a self-supporting operation within two
years. At this time, it appears that most of the IRC services can become self-sup-
porting. This can be achieved based on income from subscription fees, handling and
postage charges and publication sales.
The Association of Boards of Certification (ABC). During the last few years, ABC has
developed a program, financed by a multi-year grant, with declining Federal support,
to market a variety of services to its State member boards. A variety of examination
services will be offered to member certification boards, ranging from providing test
questions to providing a complete examination and grading service. Technical assist-
ance and program audits are other services being offered to member boards. The
leadership of ABC is optimistic that the use of these services will grow sufficiently in
the next few years and will provide an adequate base upon which to operate without
outside financial support.
The Joint Training Coordinating Committee (JTCC). This organization had a number
of projects previously funded by EPA grants. Products included a directory of State
Agency training and certification personnel, a guide to developing a State training
coordinating committee, and a process for evaluating operator training instructional
materials. Current activities are focused on providing a coordinating activity for
member organizations and State coordinating committees.
The National Trainers Institute (NTI). This project is managed through a grant with
Batelle Memorial Institute. Eight courses for water quality trainers have been
presented on technical and instructional topics. Attendance has varied among the
courses. There is not yet enough data to evaluate the success and potential of this
concept, or whether it can be self-supporting.
The National Environmental Trainers Association (NETA). This organization was
independently formed and has accepted EPA grants to carry out mutually supportive
projects. NETA is comprised of individual members concerned with environmental
training. The organization undertakes projects primarily to serve its members. To date
NETA has developed a directory of environmental trainers and sources of training;
has provided a clearinghouse function for training activities within two EPA Regions;
and has annual conferences for its members. NETA has a plan to achieve self-
sufficiency based on services offered to members and other trainers.
19
-------
The National Demonstration Water Project (NDWP). This consortium project (also
involving NETA and the American Clean Water Association) is helping States identify
and aid small facilities requiring on-site, over-the-shoulder assistance needed to
achieve and maintain effective operations and maintenance. This project was initiated
late in FY 82 and will be evaluated throughout the year.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The Agency and States are implementing results-oriented policies to ensure municipal
wastewater treatment facilities achieve and maintain compliance with permit and effluent
requirements. Accomplishing these results will require effective operations and maintenance
practices by trained operators.
EPA encourages State (and local) responsibility for providing adequate training programs,
which will produce the qualified personnel needed to operate current and future wastewater
treatment facilities. The Agency believes that past efforts to establish State self-sufficiency
have provided the basis for an accelerated transition of overall training program management
and funding responsibility to States.
Operator training funds, added by Congress to the Agency's budgets, are being channeled
primarily to ongoing State training efforts through State training centers or State agencies.
20
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Water Pollution Control Act of 1956; July 9, 1956; Public Law 84-660
2. The Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966; November 3, 1966; Public Law 89-753
3. The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970; April 3, 1970; Public Law 91-224
4. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972; September 28, 1972;
Public Law 92-500
5. The Clean Water Act of 1977; December 27, 1977; Public Law 95-217
6. Manpower An'd Training Needs In Water Pollution Control, Report of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration to the Congress; August 2, 1967; 90th Congress, Senate
Document No. 49
7. A Report to Congress On Water Pollution Control Manpower Development And Training
Activities; The Environmental Protection Agency; Office Of Water Programs; Washington,
D. C.; March 1972
8. A Report To Congress On Water Pollution Control Manpower And Training Activities;
Environmental Protection Agency; December 31, 1973
9. 109(b) State Training Center Facility Assessment, Program Evaluation, and Guide
Development; Final Report by Michael P. Miklas, Jr., Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, Texas, under EPA Grant T-901016-01
21
-------
-------
United States Official Business
Environmental Protection Penalty for Private Use
Agency $300
»
n DC 20460
------- |