United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Water
(WH-547)
EPA 430/09-91-024
November 1991
1990 Needs Survey
Report To Congress

Assessment Of Needed
Publicly Owned Wastewater
Treatment Facilities In The
United States-
Including  Federally Recognized
Indian Tribes And
Alaska Native Villages

-------
Document is available for sale to the public through:

 Dr. Howe, U.S. EPA Instruction Resource Center,
   1200 Chambers Road, Columbus, Ohio 43212

      National Technical Information Service,
 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161

-------
         UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON. D.C.  20460
                              HOY 27 1991
                                               THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable Dan Quayle
President of the Senate
Washington, D.C.  20510

Dear Mr. President:

     Enclosed is the Environmental Protection Agency's  (EPA) 1990
Needs Survey report on the "Assessment of Needed Publicly Owned
Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the United States -  Including
Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages."
This report is required by Sections 205(a) and 516  (b)(1) of the
Clean Water Act (CWA).

     The 1990 Needs Survey, a joint effort by the States and EPA,
summarizes the capital investment required to build or  improve
needed municipal wastewater treatment facilities.  These
estimates address needs both for facilities eligible for State
Revolving Funds (SRF) under Title VI of the CWA, as well as needs
for the traditional eligibilities for construction grant funds
under Title II.

     The 1990 estimates reported for the traditional
eligibilities are based on estimates documented in our  1988 Needs
Survey with adjustments made for inflation and any needs met by
Federal grants or loans since 1988.  Supplemental estimates of
eligible needs were provided by States and address costs for
revised planning and growth, new enforceable requirements, and
new eligibilities under the SRF program.

     This report also highlights the results of an assessment of
the wastewater treatment and collection needs of all Federally
recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages.  This
assessment, which updates EPA's first assessment of Indian needs
submitted to Congress in January 1989, is based on a survey done
by the Indian Health Service as well as separate estimates
supplied by several Indian Tribes.

-------
     I would be pleased to further discuss the results of this
survey at your convenience.

                              Sincerely yours,
Enclosure

-------
        UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                       WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

                           NOV 2 7 1991
                                              THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable Thomas P. Foley
Speaker of the House
  of Representatives
Washington, D.C.  20515

Dear Mr. Speaker:

     Enclosed is the Environmental Protection Agency's  (EPA) 1990
Needs Survey report on the "Assessment of Needed Publicly Owned
Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the United States - Including
Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages."
This report is required by Sections 205(a) and 516  (b)(l) of the
Clean Water Act  (CWA).

     The 1990 Needs Survey, a joint effort by the States and EPA,
summarizes the capital investment required to build or improve
needed municipal wastewater treatment facilities.  These
estimates address needs both for facilities eligible for State
Revolving Funds  (SRF) under Title VI of the CWA, as well as needs
for the traditional eligibilities for construction grant funds
under Title II.

     The 1990 estimates reported for the traditional
eligibilities are based on estimates documented in our 1988 Needs
Survey with adjustments made for inflation and any needs met by
Federal grants or loans since 1988.  Supplemental estimates of
eligible needs were provided by States and address costs for
revised planning and growth, new enforceable requirements, and
new eligibilities under the SRF program.

     This report also highlights the results of an assessment of
the wastewater treatment and collection needs of all Federally
recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages.  This
assessment, which updates EPA's first assessment of Indian needs
submitted to Congress in January 1989, is based on a survey done
by the Indian Health Service as well as separate estimates
supplied by several Indian Tribes.

-------
     I would be pleased to further discuss the results of this
survey at your convenience.

                              Sincerely yours,
Enclosure

-------
               1990 Needs Survey
              Report to Congress

Assessment of Needed Publicly Owned Wastewater Treatment
             Facilities in the United States -
       Including Federally Recognized Indian Tribes
               and Alaska Native Villages
                     November 1991

          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                    Office of Water
     Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance
                 Washington, DC 20460
                  Tele. (202) 260-5837
       Prepared Under Contract Number 68-03-3476

-------
Acknowledgements
                            Many dedicated individuals have been involved in the 1990 Needs Survey. Though it is
                            impossible to acknowledge the hard work of everyone, we would like to thank the EPA
                            Regional and State Needs Survey Coordinators and the EPA Regional Indian Needs
                            Assessment contacts for their active support and continuing interest in the Needs Survey.
                            Thanks are also extended to Dr. Richard Barror of the Indian Health Service and the IHS
                            Area Offices.
                            Regional and State Needs Survey Coordinators:

                            Region I - Hosur Chikkalingaiah

                            Connecticut - Dennis Greci
                            Maine - Dennis Purington
                            Massachusetts - Brian Jeans
                            New Hampshire - Franz Vail
                            Rhode Island - Ray Pena
                            Vermont - Nopodon Sundarabhaya

                            Region HI - Thomas O. Maher

                            Delaware - Roy R. Parikh
                            Dist. of Columbia - Mohsin Siddique
                            Maryland - John Rhoderick/Kim Cornelius
                            Pennsylvania - C.T. Fasting
                            Virginia - Kathy Maybee
                            West Virginia - Rosalie Ortega
                            Region V - William Tansey

                            Illinois - James R. Leinicke
                            Indiana - Paul Serguta
                            Michigan - Beverly Leyrer
                            Minnesota - Marco Graciana
                            Ohio - Orville Ball
                            Wisconsin - Dick Kalnicky

                            Region VII - Kelly Beard-Tittone

                            Iowa - Wayne Reed
                            Kansas - Rod Geisler
                            Missouri - Doug Garrett
                            Nebraska - Richard Johnson

                            Region IX - Denise Odenwalder

                            Arizona - Ron Frey
                            California - Cindy Williams
                            Hawaii - Dennis Tulang
                            Nevada - James B. Williams, Jr.
                            U.S. Territories - Denise Odenwalder
Region II - Ray Kvalheim

New Jersey - Chet Feehan
New York - Mark Burdyl
Puerto Rico - Eva Hernandez
Virgin Islands - Francine Lang
Region IV - Ben Chen

Alabama - David Hutchinson
Florida - Gary Powell
Georgia - Verona Barnes
Kentucky - Hamid Beykzadeh
Mississippi - Jon Huey
North Carolina - Daniel Blaisdell
South Carolina - Fred Soland
Tennessee - Bill Dobbins

Region VI - Gene Wossum

Arkansas - Frank Spears
Louisiana - Michael Vince
New Mexico - Cordelia Snow
Oklahoma - Glen Jones
Texas - Bill Allen
Region VIII - Minnie Adams

Colorado - BUI McKee
Montana - Gerri Reeves
North Dakota - Rod Beck
South Dakota - Jim Wendte
Utah - Roger Bishop
Wyoming - Shawn Sullivan

Region X - Dick Hetherington
Alaska - Lori Telfer
Idaho - Alan Stanford
Oregon - Ruby Lane
Washington - Sarah Bradley
                                                 111

-------
Acknowledgements
(continued)
                      Regional Indian Needs Assessment Contacts:

                      Tony Ciccarelli, Region I
                      Muhammad Hatim, Region II
                      Ben Chen, Region IV
                      Mary Lu Lageman, Region V
                      Marvin Waters, Region VI
                      Kelly Beard-Tittone, Region VII
                      Terry Griffith, Region VIII
                      Denise Odenwalder, Region IX
                      Geoff Keeler, Region X
                                       IV

-------
Table  of  Contents
                         Executive Summary
                                                                                  Page
                         1990 Needs Survey                                      5




                         Introduction                                              5




                         What Is the Needs Survey?                                      5



                         What Were the Major Objectives?                                6



                         What Is the Scope?                                           6




                         Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities                       7



                         What Is a Need?                                             7




                         What Are the Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities?                  8



                         What Are the Needs to Correct Significant Noncompliance?             8



                         How Have the Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities Changed?           10




                         Supplemental State Estimates                              11




                         What Is a Supplemental State Estimate?                            11



                         What Are the Supplemental State Estimates?                        12








                         Indian Needs Assessment                              15






                         Introduction                                              15




                         What Is the Indian Needs Assessment?                             15



                         What Were the Major Objectives?                                15



                         What Is the Scope?                                            15

-------
Table  of Contents (continued)
                                                                          Page
                       Indian Needs                                          17

                       What Is an Indian Need?                                    17

                       What Are the Indian Needs?                                  18

                       How Are the Indian Needs Distributed?                          20

                       How Have the Indian Needs Changed?                           21

                       Indian Needs Assessment Methodology                     23

                       What Is the Methodology?                                   23

                       What Are the Data Sources?                                  23


                       Glossary                                            25


                       Appendices                                          33

                       A.     Documentation Types                                 A-l
                       B.     Summary of 1990 Needs Survey Estimates                   B-l
                       C.     Summary of 1988 Needs Survey Estimates                   C-l
                                         VI

-------
List of  Tables
                            Table                                                          Page

                             1     Needs for Publicly Owned Wastewater
                                   Treatment Facilities                                         2

                             2     Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities for
                                   Publicly Owned Wastewater Treatment Facilities                 8

                             3     Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities,
                                   1986 Through 1990 Needs Surveys                             10

                             4     Supplemental State Estimates for Publicly
                                   Owned Wastewater Treatment Facilities                        12

                             5     Estimates for Indian Needs                                   18

                             6     Comparison of 1988 and 1989 Documented Indian Needs          21
                                                Vll

-------
List  of  Figures
                          Figure                                                     Page

                           1    Current and Design Year Needs for the                      9
                                Traditional Eligibilities

                           2    Design Year Supplemental State Estimates                    12

                           3    Distribution of 1989 IMS Indian Needs by IHS Area             20

                           4    Distribution of Supplemental Indian Needs by IHS Area         20
                                            vm

-------
Executive
Summary
This   report   provides  the
Environmental   Protection
Agency's (EPA) detailed estimate
of the capital investment needed
to build publicly owned wastewater
treatment facilities to comply with
the  requirements  of  Sections
205(a) and 516(b)(l) of the Clean
Water Act  (CWA).  In addition,
the report provides an update  of
EPA's 1988  assessment  of the
wastewater   treatment   and
collection needs   for  Federally
recognized   Indian  Tribes  and
Alaska Native Villages (hereinafter
referred to as Indians or Tribes).
1990 Needs Survey

The 1990 Needs Survey presents
cost estimates for needs eligible
under the Construction Grant and
State  Revolving  Fund  (SRF)
programs.

The scope  of the 1990  Needs
Survey  was  scaled down  from
previous efforts.   EPA adjusted
the 1988 cost estimates for Federal
grants  and  loans awarded and
inflated the results to 1990 dollars.
In  addition,   adjustments  were
made for any needs  that were
reported to EPA which were met
through non-Federal funding.  As
a   result,  the  cost   estimates
reported in this  report for  the
traditional  eligibilities  are  not
directly comparable  to  those in
previous surveys due to the revised
methodology. The States provided
supplemental estimates  of needs
for Categories I through V eligible
under   the  grant   and  SRF
programs.

In past Surveys,  States  did not
submit  documentation for  their
separate State estimates.  For the
1990   Survey,    documentation
guidelines  were  established to
assist   States    in  reporting
supplemental needs.  These needs
are  reported as  Supplemental
State  Estimates, which EPA did
not review or approve.  They are
in addition to the EPA-adjusted
needs. Although updating of the
needs by  States was  optional, a
total of 40 States and Territories
submitted supplemental estimates
to EPA.

The capital investment necessary
to satisfy all categories of need for
the traditional  eligibilities  and
supplemental State  estimates  is
presented in Table  1.  The total
20-year design  needs for  each
group are:

•  $80.4 billion to satisfy needs for
   the traditional eligibilities.

•  $30.2  billion  to  satisfy  the
   States' supplemental estimates
   of SRF eligible needs.

If these estimates  were to  be
added, the total need would be
$110.6 billion.

As indicated in Table 1, the total
need  for  the current (existing)
population is  $65 billion.  Of this
amount, approximately $12 billion
is needed to meet the construction
needs  of  facilities in significant
noncompliance   with   CWA
requirements, as reported in the
SRF Final Report to Congress.

Of the $80.4 billion in design year
needs  for traditional eligibilities,
the needs are largest for secondary
treatment at $24.9 billion.  Needs
for controlling  combined sewer
overflows  (CSO) are the second
largest   at   $16.5   billion,
representing  310 facilities  with
documented needs.

After inflation,  the needs for the
traditional  eligibilities decreased
by $6.4 billion  (7 percent) from
1988 to 1990. This reduction was
due to the adjustments for needs
that were met.

Of   the   $30.2   billion   in
supplemental estimates, the largest
increment  is also for secondary
treatment, at $12.4 billion, and the
smallest increment is for sewer
replacement/rehabilitation at $0.7
billion.

States also reported $3.2 billion in
supplemental needs for controlling
CSOs.    This   estimate,  when
combined with  the $16.5 billion,
represents  a  total  cost  of  $19.7
billion for 464 combined sewer
systems.

EPA  recognizes that the  CSO
needs estimates presented in this
report may not accurately present
the true needs since some States
have not yet priced out the costs
of fully implementing  the   1989
National CSO  Strategy.    The
strategy was issued in August  1989
and applies to approximately 1,100
combined  sewer   systems
nationwide.

-------
                              TABLE I
   CATEGORY
I   '  Secondary Treatment
II   ,'  Advanced Treatment
HIA   Infiltration/Inflow
 '  '
                • WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
                     (January 1990 Dollars la Billions)
 NEEDS FOR TRADITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL

CURRENT   DESIGN YEAR   ESTIMATES   '

                             114
                                2J
   IIIB   Replacement/Rehabilitation  3£
   IVA   New Collector Sewers      10.9
   FVB   New Interceptor Sewers      9.1
   V     Combined Sewer Overflows
   CATEGORIES I
                                          24.9
                                           47
                                        3J5
                                       13.8
                                       141
                                       IfiJ
                              6.8

                              0.7
                              aa
                              33
                              33

                             MJ
   * Current  needs  to  meet construction  needs  of  facilities in significant
    noncompliance is approximately $12.0 bUlion, as reported to the SRF final
The supplemental estimates reflect
new needs identified by the States,
revised  cost  estimates   due  to
changed plans,  the  addition  of
reserve   capacity,   and  the
satisfaction of previously identified
needs  through  State and local
financing  that  did  not  involve
Federal assistance.

The 1987  Amendments  to  the
CWA allow SRFs to fund activities
related   to   new   enforceable
requirements  and   certain'  new
eligibilities.  The new enforceable
requirements  address control  of
sludge  use  and  disposal, toxics,
and stormwater.   Estimates  of
needs  for  control  of toxics and
sludge  are   included   in   the
supplemental State estimates. The
new  SRF   eligibilities   address
control of  nonpoint  sources  of
pollution   and    ground-water,
estuarine,  and  certain wetlands
                                 protection activities.  Only a few
                                 States submitted needs for these
                                 new eligibilities  as part  of their
                                 supplemental estimates.  Several
                                 States indicated  that because of
                                 the newness of these eligibilities,
                                 needs estimates  were still being
                                 developed.    In addition,  some
                                 States   indicated  they  were
                                 developing  strategies to  address
                                 these SRF eligibilities.  To avoid
                                 any misrepresentation  of these
                                 needs, EPA did not include any
                                 cost estimates in this report for
                                 the  new   SRF   eligibilities.
                                 Similarly, estimates for stormwater
                                 control are not included.

                                 In general, while the Needs Survey
                                 focuses  primarily on the capital
                                 costs required to meet the needs
                                 of  the  Nation's  wastewater
                                 infrastructure, municipalities can
                                 sometimes   dramatically   reduce
                                 total project costs by implementing
various  water   use   efficiency
practices. Included are short and
long-term  water use  reduction,
water  recycling,  and wastewater
reclamation  and reuse.    For
example,  these  practices  may
result in the deferral of expanding
existing facilities or the downsizing
of new facilities.  Municipalities
should  consider comparing  the
cost of increasing municipal water
use efficiency with  the  cost  of
building new treatment capacity
before implementing new projects.
Indian Needs
Assessment

In January 1989, EPA submitted a
report  to   Congress   on   the
wastewater   treatment   and
collection needs  of all Federally
recognized  Indian  Tribes   and
Alaska  Native  Villages.    The
assessment   was   required   by
Section 518(b) of the CWA  and
was conducted in cooperation with
the Indian Health Service (IHS).
Indian Tribes expressed  concern
that not all of their needs were
included.  They requested that the
assessment be updated to be more
inclusive and  that  the results be
transmitted to  Congress  in  the
1990 report.  A major objective of
this assessment was to ensure that
all needs  are  reported  for  all
Tribes and Villages.

At the time this assessment  was
conducted,  EPA  used the most
recent   (1989)   IHS  estimates
available as the foundation for this
assessment and supplemented the
data with estimates of needs from
Tribes and other sources.

-------
The  estimates   of  the  capital
investment required to address the
current Indian needs are:

•  $633 million to satisfy the IHS
    documented needs.

•  $89  million  to  satisfy  the
    Indians'  estimates   of
    supplemental needs.

Subsequent to the EPA survey,
IHS has performed a more recent
assessment based on  1990  data,
which shows  documented needs
have dropped from $633 million in
1989 to $578  million in 1990.

The IHS-reported needs represent
estimates   documented   using
established  IHS  criteria.    The
supplemental needs were provided
to EPA directly by Indian Tribes
and other sources.  EPA did not
establish  documentation  criteria
for the supplemental  needs  and
relied on  the sources of the  data
for  accuracy of  the  estimates
provided.

The largest portion of the  IHS
reported needs is concentrated in
Alaska,  at  approximately  $468
million, or 74 percent.  The large
needs  in   Alaska   represent
construction   of   entirely   new
facilities  due   to   inadequate
wastewater   treatment   and
collection in many Villages. Many
of these needs were not previously
reported due to the high cost of
constructing wastewater  facilities
in Alaska,  where project feasibility
is affected by the  remote location
of   many  Villages   and   the
difficulties  in constructing these
facilities  in   arctic  conditions.
Supplemental  needs  are   also
highest in Alaska,  at $26.8 million,
or about one-third of the total.
The needs represent  the  cost to
provide wastewater treatment and
collection for approximately 1,800
projects for 452,000 Indians  and
Alaska Natives.

The net increase in documented
Indian needs is $363 million from
1988 to 1989. The major increase
is attributable to a change in the
IHS estimating procedures, which
no  longer   contain   a  cost-
effectiveness component.  In  this
assessment, IHS  estimated  the
costs of providing piped  indoor
wastewater   treatment  and
collection facilities for most homes
and communities.  Some of these
project costs would not be  eligible
under  the rules  which apply to
State participation in  the Title II
or VI grant programs. Previously,
IHS sought to estimate the cost
only  of   projects   that  were
economically  and   technically
feasible to fund and construct.

Overall, this assessment identified
212  projects,  or approximately
$242 million in needs, for Tribes
with no previously reported needs.
The majority of these  needs, $219
million, were  for  92  projects in
Alaska.

-------
 1990  Needs

 Survey


Introduction


What Is the Needs
Survey?

This report summarizes the EPA's
biennial assessment of the cost of
constructing  all  publicly  owned
wastewater   treatment   works
necessary to meet the goals of the
CWA.  This report is required by
Sections 205(a) and 516(b)(l) of
the Act. The 1990 Needs Survey,
a joint effort of the  States and
EPA,  is the  tenth Survey since
enactment of the Federal Water
Pollution   Control  Act
Amendments of 1972.
Previous Surveys were based on
Construction   Grant   program
eligibilities under Title II  of the
CWA.  Cost estimates presented
in prior Surveys served as a basis
for congressional allotment  of
funds to address the provisions of
the CWA.

The 1987  Amendments to the
CWA   established   the   SRF
program  under Title  VI.  As
funding under the Construction
Grant program  phases out, SRF
loans become the principal funding
source  for   construction  of
wastewater  treatment    and
collection  projects.   The 1987
Amendments also established new
enforceable  requirements  and
other categories of needs eligible
for funding  under  the  SRF
program.  The  new enforceable
requirements  address control of
sludge  use  and disposal,  toxics,
and stormwater.  The new SRF
eligibilities  address  control  of
nonpoint sources of pollution and
ground-water,  estuarine,   and
wetlands protection.  The 1990
Needs   Survey  addresses  SRF
eligible needs as well as updates to
the  needs   for  the  traditional
eligibilities.

The   Needs   Survey   database
contains  cost   and   technical
information   on   approximately
27,300 wastewater treatment and
collection  facilities  nationwide,
including facilities with  unmet
needs and those for which needs
have already been met.

The   Needs   Survey   is  used
extensively to assist the Federal
government  and   the States in
program   planning,   policy
evaluation,  and  program
management. Private firms, pubh'c
interest  groups,   and  trade
associations  use   Needs Survey
information  in marketing,  cost
estimating, and policy formulation.
      A clarifier at the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant in San Jose, California.

-------
What Were the Major
Objectives?

The major objectives of the 1990
Needs Survey were to update the
1988  documented needs for the
traditional  eligibilities,   and  to
collect cost estimates for  needs
now  eligible   under the   SRF
program.

In previous Surveys, States  were
encouraged to update  technical
data on wastewater facilities, such
as  flow,  treatment  levels, and
pollutant  characteristics.    This
report does not include summaries
of technical data as in  the past.
Technical data collection was not
required,  and many States  opted
not to update these  data due to
resource  constraints and the first-
time effort to identify needs for
SRF funding.
What Is  the  Scope?

In the  1986 and 1988 Surveys,
States provided cost and technical
data,   along   with   supporting
documentation,   for   projects
eligible  for  construction  grants
under Title II of the CWA. EPA
reviewed the cost estimates and
documentation   for   accuracy,
national   consistency,   and
conformance   with   acceptable
criteria  and  either approved  or
rejected the States' estimates.

The  scope  of the 1990  Needs
Survey  was  scaled  down from
previous efforts. The 1990 Survey
approach  was  changed in three
ways. First, States were not asked
to update their 1988 cost estimates
for   the  traditional  eligibilities.
Rather,  EPA adjusted the  1988
needs estimates for Federal grants
and  loans  awarded and  inflated
the results to 1990 dollars.  In
addition, adjustments were  made
for needs estimates reported to
EPA that were met through non-
Federal funding.  Second, States
were  asked  to  submit,  on  an
optional  basis,   supplemental
estimates   of needs   for  SRF
funding,   including  needs   for
Categories  I  through  V, new
enforceable   requirements,  and
other SRF eligibilities.

Third, in an effort to ensure some
level of  consistency  among  the
State  estimates,  the 1990 Needs
Survey  workgroup,  with  EPA
involvement,  developed a list of
suggested   documentation
guidelines  for  State  use  in
documenting   estimates  (see
Appendix A). In  recognition of
this effort  to  ensure consistency
and reliability, the previous  usage
of "Separate State Estimates" has
been modified to  "Supplemental
State Estimates."   EPA  did not
require   the   States  to  submit
documentation   for   these
supplemental estimates.

-------
Needs  for  the
Traditional
Eligibilities
What Is  a Need?

A  "need"   for  the   traditional
eligibilities is a cost estimate for
building   a  publicly   owned
wastewater treatment facility that
is eligible  for  Federal financial
assistance under Title  II  of  the
CWA.  The 1988  cost estimates
for Categories I through V were
adjusted for  grants  and  loans
awarded and  inflated  to  1990
dollars. They represent the 1990
needs  for   the   traditional
eligibilities for facilities used in the
conveyance,  storage,  treatment,
recycling,   and  reclamation  of
municipal  wastewater.    These
estimates   include   constructing
entirely   new   facilities   and
enlarging, upgrading, abandoning,
and replacing existing  facilities.

The   estimates  are   for   the
following categories of needs:

• Category I —
   Secondary Treatment
• Category II —
   Advanced Treatment
• Category IIIA --
   Infiltration/Inflow Correction
• Category IIIB --
   Replacement/Rehabilitation
   of Sewers
• Category IVA --
   New Collector Sewers
• Category IVB -
   New Interceptor Sewers
• Category V —
   Combined Sewer Overflows

Detailed  explanations  of  each
category are   provided  in  the
Glossary.

Needs   for    the    traditional
eligibilities  do not include needs
that are newly eligible under Title
VI (i.e., needs for  stormwater
management,   nonpoint   source
pollution control, etc.).  They do
not include costs that are ineligible
for Federal assistance under Titles
II  or   VI,    such   as  house
connections to sewers  and  the
acquisition of land if not part of a
treatment  process.  Additionally,
the estimates do not include costs
for operation and maintenance.
Funding eligibility for Categories
IIIB(replacement/rehabilitationof
sewers),  IVA   (new  collector
sewers), and V (combined sewer
overflows) is restricted. However,
in the 1988 Survey, costs for these
categories were included, because
the  CWA  provided a  governor
with  discretionary   funding
authority to use up to 20 percent
of  a State's  construction grant
allotment   for   these   project
categories.   Because these needs
were eligible  for  funding  under
this authority, the entire need was
reported in the Survey.

In the previous two Surveys, EPA
reviewed   State-submitted
documentation for each  facility
and  for each category of need to
ensure  that  it had an  existing
problem and  was  eligible  for
funding.    Only  facilities  with
documented water quality and/or
public  health  problems  were
included in these Surveys. The list
of acceptable documentation types
used in  the  1988  Survey  is
presented in  Appendix  A and
explained in detail in the  1988
Needs Survey Report to Congress.

The  cost   estimates   for   the
traditional   eligibilities   address
needs for two time periods:

1.   Current Needs -  needs for
     documented   facilities   to
     satisfy the current or existing
     population.

2.   Design Year Needs - needs
     for  documented facilities  to
     satisfy  an approximate  20-
     year design life for facilities.

It should be  noted  that  these
needs are based on the population
data from the 1988 Needs Survey.

-------
What Are the Needs
for the Traditional
Eligibilities?

EPA's cost estimate of the capital
investment necessary to  address
the Nation's municipal wastewater
treatment needs  is presented  in
Table  2.    An  estimated  $80.4
billion is  required to satisfy the
design year  needs   of  facilities
documented  in  the   1988 Needs
Survey.   Of this  amount,  $65.0
billion is  needed to satisfy the
needs  of  the current population.
The   $15.4   billion   difference
represents  the   cost to  serve
population growth within  these
service areas over the 20-year life
of the project.  A State-by-State
listing  of  the 1990 needs for the
traditional eligibilities is presented
in Appendix B.

If   only   treatment   needs
(Categories   I   and  II)   are
considered, the design year needs
are   $29.6   billion,   and   the
corresponding  needs  for  the
current  population  are   $22.1
billion.

There  are  approximately  1,100
wastewater treatment facilities that
have   combined  sewer   systems
nationwide.  Of these, 310 facilities
have  documented needs  totaling
$16.5  billion.   This reflects  a
reduction of 18 facilities from the
1988  survey, where  328 facilities
had  documented  CSO   needs.
Additional   estimates   which
supplement   these   needs  are
discussed  in the "What  Are the
Supplemental State  Estimates?"
section of the report.
                             TABLE 2

             NEEDS FOR THE TRADITIONAL ELIGIBILITIES
      FOR PUBLICLY OWNED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
                    (January 1990 Dollars in Billions)
   NEEDS
   CATEGORY

   I    Secondary Treatment
   II   Advanced Treatment
   HIA  Infiltration/Iiinow
        Correction
   IHB  Replacement/Rehabilitation*
   IVA  New Collector Sewers*
   IVB  New Interceptor Sewers
   V   Combined Sewer Overflows*
   CATEGORIES I - V

   TREATMENT CATEGORIES I - II

   SIGNIFICANT NONCOMPLIANCE
DESIGN YEAR    CURRENT

                     ms

                      2JS
   US
    47
   13.8
   14.1
   16.5
   80.4
                      M
                     10.9
                      M
                     6SJ)

                     22.1  •'

                     12.0**
   * For these categories under Title II of Ihe Ctean Water Act, a governor may use up to 20 percent of a
     Statef aBotinent in an? Oral year; however, combined sewer overflow project* funded under Section
     201(n)(l) nay exceed thii amount.

   •• Estimate reported in SRF Flint Report to Congress.
The relationship of design year
needs to current needs is shown in
Figure 1.
What Are the Needs to
Correct Significant
Noncompliance?

A subset of the current year needs
of  $65 billion is the estimated
investment needed to meet the
cost of construction necessary to
bring   significant  noncompliers
back into compliance.  As shown
in Table  2,  EPA estimated this
cost at $12 billion in its SRF Final
Report to Congress. This estimate
was based on a compilation of
data from several sources.
EPA used, as a starting point, the
"significant  noncompliance"  list
(SNC).  Facilities on the SNC list
generally have flows greater than 1
million gallons per day (mgd) and
have enforceable violations of the
CWA.  The list was then refined
by   determining,   from   EPA's
Permit Compliance System (PCS),
which  facilities  had  outstanding
construction  needs necessary  to
achieve or return to compliance as
of June 30, 1990.  (For example,
needs for facilities in violation  of
reporting requirements or  needing
corrective action in operation and
maintenance were not included.)
Added to this list was a second list
of  facilities  which   had  been
classified  as   SNC  but,   for
enforcement purposes, were  no

-------
longer in SNC because they were
on   enforcement  schedules  for
construction. These facilities  still
need  construction   to   attain
physical compliance.  Finally, to
capture the construction needs for
facilities with flows of less than 1
mgd, EPA expanded the definition
of SNC to include  Category I  and
II needs from the  1988 Needs
Survey for  this group.  The  $12
billion estimate is the  cost of
construction to bring  these three
groups   of   facilities  into
compliance.

The SNC-related needs discussed
above only represent a "snapshot"
of needs at a given point in time.
While it is not possible to quantify
future  SNC-related needs, it is
predictable  that   there  will  be
additional  significant  violations
that will require  construction to
correct. The reasons for potential
violations include:   1) population
growth, which will generate flows
and/or pollutant loadings in excess
of design capacity; 2) obsolescence
and  deterioration  of  existing
wastewater   treatment
infrastructure; and 3)  additional
requirements in the areas of toxics
control, storm water management,
and sludge disposal as regulations
are   put   into   place   and
implemented.
                         FIGURE 1
            CURRENT AND DESIGN YEAR NEEDS
            FOR THE TRADITIONAL ELIGIBILITIES

               (January 1990 Dollars in Billions)
Design Year
     Current
                      20
40
100

-------
How Have the Needs
for the Traditional
Eligibilities Changed?

After accounting for inflation, the
design  year  estimate  for  the
traditional eligibilities  decreased
by  $6.4  billion, approximately  7
percent,   from  1988  to  1990.
Estimates from the 1988  Survey
are  summarized   by  State  in
Appendix C.

This decrease in needs since the
1988 Survey is due to the award of
Federal grants and loans as well as
some needs being  met through
State and  local  financing.   A
comparison  of  the design year
needs for the last three Surveys  is
presented hi Table 3. It should be
noted that the methodology used
by EPA to derive  the  1990 needs
for  the  traditional  eligibilities
differs from that used in the 1986
and 1988 surveys.   As a  result,
1990  estimates  presented  in the
table   may   not   be   directly
comparable with those in previous
surveys.
  •'"  -   •             -    TABLES      .'"•:
  DESIGN YEAR NEEDS FOR THE TRADITIONAL ELIGIBILITIES
             1986 THROUGH 1990 NEEDS SURVEYS*
          (January 1990 Dollars in Billions Except as Noted)
 NEEDS                '  •' -  .;.  '
 CATEGORY          - . • .::" ..*::';

 I        Secondary Treatment       •
 II       Advanced Treatment
 IIIA     Infiltration/Inflow Correction
 IIIB     Replacement/Rehabilitation
' Ijfirii \:,. -   New Cflll8iCI0l? §WwlM?$\ ; •. . • • ••
•'Rl-; ;; '•• New inteiwftorSwBas^*,. ,'•
 V />'' \   Combined Sewer Overflows v" ^

 CATEGORIES I - V
            - V (Pfaatoal
                                         MM
                                          33.1
                                            835
                                                     29.6
Note that the 1999 estimates were derived using a different methodology than
that used in previous surveys.';,;-,:;:;-,'.'•;t'•';';<•';.;;• .••'.•.'  . '' ••'••"'•.' •:';.:-'-- •  ;:''v,'>:v,"-'':
                                             10

-------
Supplemental
State  Estimates
What Is a
Supplemental
State Estimate?

Historically, States have had  the
opportunity to submit a separate
State estimate  for needs which
they believed were valid, but could
not  be  documented  using  the
EPA-accepted   documentation.
These  needs  were not  reviewed
nor  approved by EPA and have
been reported separately from the
EPA documented cost estimates.

For  the  1990 Needs Survey,  the
concept  of the  separate  State
estimates needed  to be revised,
since  States   would   now  be
reporting  needs   under   new
guidelines  to   address  SRF
eligibilities.  The States reported
needs  for SRF eligibilities which
supplement   the  traditional
eligibilities.   The  supplemental
estimates  include  needs   for
Categories I through V, as well as
needs for the new SRF eligibilities.

In past Surveys, States  were  not
required to submit documentation
for their separate State estimates.
However, to maintain  a level of
national  consistency for the 1990
Survey, States  agreed  to follow
suggested   documentation
guidelines (see Appendix A) in the
reporting of supplemental needs.
The  1988 documentation was used
as  the  base  and modified  to
include additional  documentation
types for the new SRF eligibilities.
The actual documentation for the
various estimates was not reviewed
by EPA.

These  supplemental  needs
represent an increase or decrease
to the needs for the traditional
eligibilities.  They also represent
the  best  available  estimate of
changes hi needs due to the  1987
Amendments to the CWA.

Ah1 supplemental State estimates
are presented for the design year;
current estimates are not reported
since many  States  maintain that
SRF eligibilities  do not have the
same restrictions as those of the
Construction Grants program.

Reporting  of the  Supplemental
State estimates was optional. A
total of 40 States and Territories
(or  approximately  two-thirds of
the  U.S.)   participated  in  this
Survey effort.

In EPA's guidance to the States,
two  types   of  supplemental
estimates were identified for the
reporting of needs.   They were
incremental   needs   for   the
traditional eligibilities (I  through
V) and needs for  the new  SRF
eligibilities.      Each  type  is
described below.

Incremental   Needs   for   the
Traditional  Eligibilities  - These
needs   include   increases   or
decreases to the adjusted needs
for  the  traditional  eligibilities.
They reflect needs  for  new or
revised  planning, reserve capacity,
and reductions to needs due to
State  and  local   financing  of
construction   without   Federal
assistance.
Needs for New SRF Eligibilities -
The 1987  Amendments to the
CWA allow SRFs to fund activities
related  to  the  new enforceable
requirements and certain types of
activities that are now eligible for
SRF funding. States were invited
to provide supplemental estimates
for  the  following  needs:   (See
Glossary for a definition of each
category.)

  • New Enforceable
    Requirements

        Stormwater control
        Toxics control
        Control of sludge use and
        disposal

  • New SRF Eligibilities

        Nonpoint source pollution
        control
        Ground-water protection
        Estuarine protection
        Certain  wetlands
        protection activities

While States identified their needs
for stormwater control separately,
needs purely for control of toxics
and sludge use and disposal were
included in Categories I and II.
                                                     11

-------
What Are the
Supplemental
State Estimates?

The supplemental State  estimate
of needs for Categories I through
V is  $30.2  billion, as shown in
Table 4.  If this estimate  is added
to the needs  for the  traditional
eligibilities, the total need would
be $110.6 billion, as presented in
Appendix  B.    As  previously
mentioned, the supplemental State
estimates are costs that  reflect
either an increase or decrease to
EPA's estimate of needs for the
traditional eligibilities. Included in
these estimates are increases that
result  from  new  or   revised
planning.    Also  included  are
decreases due to State and local
financing of construction  (without
Federal assistance) and revisions
in the planning and/or design of
facilities.  Some  States have met
the requirements of the National
Municipal  Policy  (NMP)  and
excluded  those   satisfied  needs
from  their estimates.  The NMP
required municipal compliance by
July 1,  1988,  whether or not a
municipality   received  Federal
funding for sewage treatment plant
construction.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of
these estimates by  type  of need.
Of the estimated $30.2 billion, the
largest need increments  are  for
secondary treatment (Category I)
and advanced treatment (Category
II) at $12.4 billion and $6.6 billion,
respectively.  Needs identified to
date  for  control of  toxics  and
sludge  use   and  disposal  are
included in these categories.

The $30.2 billion in supplemental
needs  includes   $3.2  billion to
address  needs   for   controlling
CSOs.    This  estimate,  when
                             TABLE 4          "      '    • '

                  SUPPLEMENTAL STATE ESTIMATES
      FOR PUBLICLY OWNED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
                    (January 1990 Dollare in Billions)
                                                 DESIGN
           NEEDS
           CATEGQiar
          i
          ii
          IIIA
          IIIB
          IVA
          IVB
          V
Secondary Treatment
AflN^ftBC'Bli Ti'MRilWjii
Infiltration/Inflow Correction
New Collector Sewers  •' '	;
New Interceptor Sewers   '.
Combined Sewer Overflows
                                                 64
                                                 0.8
                                                 ••4»-
                                                 '34-
          TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL STATE
          ESTIMATES (Categories I. V)
                             FIGURE 2
         DESIGN YEAR SUPPLEMENTAL STATE ESTIMATES

                  (January 1990 Dollars in Billions)
            I
 II
                        IIIA    IIIB    IVA
                      Categories of Need
Note: Total Supplemental State Estimates = $30.2 Billion
IVB
combined with the $16.5 billion
reported on Table 2,  may  not
accurately present the true needs.
                 Some States have not yet priced
                 out the costs of fully implementing
                 the 1989 National CSO Strategy,
                                            12

-------
which was issued in August 1989.
The   strategy  applies   to
approximately  1,100  combined
sewer systems nationwide.  The
$3.2   billion   represents   newly
identified needs  for 154 facilities.
This   estimate   also  includes
additional needs due to  revised
planning for 60 of the 310 facilities
discussed   in   the   traditional
eligibilities section.

A   detailed   listing  of   the
supplemental  State  estimates is
also presented in Appendix B.

Although the  1990 Survey invited
the  optional  reporting of new
types  of  eligible  needs   (e.g.,
nonpoint  source  pollution  control
and ground-water,  estuarine, and
wetlands  protection),  only a few
States submitted cost estimates for
these  eligibilities.   Many  States
indicated  that  because  of  the
newness  of  these   eligibilities,
needs estimates  were still being
developed.    In  addition,  some
States indicated  that they  were
developing  strategies  to  address
the   requirements   of   these
programs before identifying needs.
To avoid any misrepresentation of
these needs, EPA did not include
any cost estimates  in this report
for these eligibilities.  Similarly,
estimates  for  storm water control
are not included.
                                                        13

-------
 Indian
 Needs
 Assessment
Introduction
What Is the Indian
Needs Assessment?

This section of the report presents
EPA's  1990  assessment  of the
capital costs required to  address
the  wastewater  treatment  and
collection  needs  for  Federally
recognized  Indian  Tribes  and
Alaska Native Villages (hereinafter
referred to as  Indians or Tribes).

In 1988, EPA conducted  its first
assessment    of  wastewater
treatment needs for all Tribes, as
required by Section 518(b) of the
Clean  Water  Act  (CWA),  as
amended by the Water  Quality
Act of 1987. The 1988 assessment
was prepared in cooperation with
the Indian Health Service (IHS)
and  reported  in the Report to
Congress:   Indian   Wastewater
Treatment Needs Assessment and
Assistance in January 1989.
Indian Tribes expressed concern
that not all of their needs were
included   in   EPA's   1988
assessment. They requested that
the assessment be updated to be
more inclusive  and the  results
presented  in  the  1990  Needs
Survey Report to Congress.

For the 1990  assessment, EPA
used   the  most  recent   IHS
estimates  of   needs   as  the
foundation and requested  review
of the data from EPA Regions,
States, Indian  Tribes and  other
sources to identify any  additional
needs.    At  the  time   EPA
conducted  this  assessment, the
IHS 1989 estimates were the most
recent estimates available.   EPA
also sought the participation of all
Tribes to  the  greatest  extent
possible.

To    address   the  wastewater
treatment and collection needs of
Indian Tribes and Alaska  Native
Villages, the  1987  Amendments
established the Indian  Set-Aside
Grant Program.  Section  518(c)
authorized   program   funding
through a one-half percent set-
aside from the Construction Grant
program  appropriations,  which
ended in fiscal year 1990. Overall,
39 projects have been identified to
receive  funding  through  this
program, accounting for the $27
million appropriated. No further
funding is authorized.  However,
other sources of funding, such as
the   IHS,  the  Department  of
Housing and Urban Development
(HUD), and the  Farmers  Home
Administration (FmHA) may be
available to Indians for wastewater
treatment and collection facilities.
In  addition,  Indian Tribes  and
Alaska Native Villages are eligible
to receive  State Revolving  Fund
loans under Title VI of the CWA
if they are able to satisfy the loan
conditions.
What Were the
Major Objectives?

The major objectives of this Indian
Needs Assessment were to:

•   Update  EPA's  1988  cost
     estimates   of  Indian
     wastewater  treatment  and
     collection needs.

•   Obtain  cost  estimates for
     Indian Tribes  and  Alaska
     Native Villages with needs
     not  identified in the  first
     assessment.

The needs obtained consist of
IHS's 1989 documented estimates
and  supplemental  estimates
submitted by the Indian Tribes.
What Is the Scope?

This  assessment  estimates  the
wastewater  treatment  and
collection  needs  of  all Indian
Tribes as  defined by the CWA.
Section  518(h)(2)  of the Act
defines an Indian Tribe as "any
Indian tribe, band,  group  or
community recognized  by  the
Secretary  of  the Interior and
exercising governmental authority
over  a   Federal   Indian
Reservation."  In November 1988,
Congress expanded the eligibility
of the Indian Set-Aside  Grant
Program (P.L. 100-581) to include
Tribes that currently reside  on
former  reservation   lands   in
                                                   15

-------
Oklahoma  and  Alaska  Native
Villages.

EPA placed special emphasis on
contacting all Tribes,  particularly
those in  Alaska  and California,
where estimates were thought to
be   incomplete   in   the   first
assessment.

The   IHS   focused   on   the
residential needs of Tribes. Needs
of  the current  population  are
presented,  rather than  of  the
future population, because of the
limited  availability of  accurate
population   projections   and
planning  data  on a  nationwide
basis. The supplemental estimates
obtained from Tribes may not be
consistent with the needs reported
by IHS since they were estimated
by other sources.

Cost  information, and  a  limited
amount of technical information, is
available  on  the   wastewater
treatment and collection needs for
approximately 220 Indian Tribes
and  180  Alaska Native Villages.
Needs   were   identified   for
approximately 1,800 projects.
                                            16

-------
Indian Needs
What is an Indian
Need?

An Indian need is defined as an
estimate of the capital investment
necessary  to  provide  wastewater
treatment  and collection for all
Indian and Alaska Native homes
and communities.  Estimates are
included for  the  construction of
entirely   new   facilities   and
enlarging, upgrading, and replacing
existing facilities regardless of cost
effectiveness.

The definition of  a "need" as
applied in this assessment is more
inclusive than that used in the
Survey of State needs discussed in
the previous section of this report.
Therefore,  the two  assessments
cannot  be   directly  compared.
Needs for  Indians may  include
costs  for  house  connections or
other costs not included in the
State Survey,  and  which would be
ineligible for  funding under the
CWA for municipalities. They are
included in the Indian assessment
due to then- eligibility for funding
under the Indian Set-Aside Grant
Program   or  other   Federal
programs,   such  as   those
administered by IHS and HUD.

The IHS estimates are based on
needs which are documented using
established criteria. The estimates
were derived mainly through  field
visits and consultation with Tribes,
while   sanitary   surveys   and
feasibility studies  were also used.
These  needs   are based  on the
costs  to provide piped  indoor
facilities for  most homes.   An
exception is made for homes in
extremely   remote   areas,
particularly in Alaska. This differs
from the 1988 assessment which
was based on needs for facilities
that   were   economically  and
technically feasible to  fund and
construct.  This did not  always
involve piped facilities, particularly
in Alaska,  where  an alternative
system, i.e.,  a honey bucket haul
system, is less expensive and more
feasible to construct. This change
in IHS's cost estimating criteria
resulted  from the Indian Health
Care Amendments of 1988 (P.L.
100-713).

The  supplemental Indian needs
were developed by disseminating
IHS's 1989 data to the Tribes for
review to identify additional needs.
As a result, some Tribes may have
reported   needs   that   IHS
considered, but did not include in
its assessment.    IHS  does  not
report needs if they do not follow
IHS criteria.  For example, needs
identified by Tribes for replacing
on-site septic systems with a sewer
system may not be reported if IHS
determines there is not a public
health justification. EPA did not
establish documentation criteria or
review   these   supplemental
estimates,  but   relied  on   the
various sources for the accuracy of
the estimates.
                                                     17

-------
What Are the Indian
Needs?
Table 5 presents estimates of the
capital  investment  necessary  to
address the  current  wastewater
treatment and collection needs for
Indian Tribes and Alaska Native
Villages by IHS Area.  It consists
of estimates developed by IHS and
supplemental estimates provided
by other sources.

IMS-Documented Needs

Based on needs identified by IHS
in  1989,   IHS   estimated  that
approximately  $633  million  is
required to address current Indian
needs  for  wastewater treatment
and  collection  facilities.  These
estimates were documented using
established criteria and are in 1989
dollars.
million, or 74 percent.  Needs are
lowest  in   the  Billings   and
California Areas, at $2.3 million
and $5.2 million, respectively.

A large portion of the needs for
Alaska  is  concentrated in  10
projects,  totalling $257  million.
The  increase in needs is due to
two  major  factors.   Needs for
some Villages were  not  included
in the  1988 assessment if  IHS
determined  that  the  proposed
project was  not economically and
technically feasible  to fund and
construct.  Project feasibility was
affected by the remote location of
many Villages and the difficulties
in   constructing   wastewater
treatment and collection facilities
in arctic conditions.
                                   The largest portion of the needs
                                   reported by IHS is concentrated hi
                                   Alaska  at  approximately  $468
                                   In addition, most of the needs for
                                   Alaska  represent   major   new
                                   construction  of  piped   indoor
                                                        •    ; -- TABUJS;  , '   :;. '.

                                                       ESTIMATES FOR INDIAN NEEDS
                                                            (Dollars in Millions)
                                         IBS
                                         Aberdeen
                                         Alaska
                                         Albuquerque
                                          Billings
                                          California
                                          Nashville
                                          (East Coast)
                                          Navajo
                                          Oklahoma City
                                          Phoenix
                                          Portland
                                          Tucson
                         .DOCUMENTED
                          NEEDS
                           4683
                             7.9
                             8.9
                             2J
                             5.2
                            246

                            30.4
                            30.1
                            224
                             7J
                            6.9
                                          TOTALS              «33.«

                                        IHS 1990 assessment shows need of $578.0 million.
                                             18

-------
facilities,   regardless   of  their
construction cost.   Most  of  the
systems currently in use are pit
privies  and honey bucket haul
systems. However, in some cases,
where the costs for a piped system
would   be very high,  the  IHS
estimates   are  still  based  on
alternative systems, such as honey
bucket haul systems.

It should  be noted  that IHS  has
just completed and submitted its
report  to  Congress  containing its
1990 estimates which show a need
of $578 million (as compared to
$633 million in 1989).  A major
portion of the decrease in  this
estimate  can  be  attributed to
needs which have been funded by
IHS  and by  EPA  through its
Indian  Grant Set-Aside Program
during  1989/90.   EPA's  report
continues  to present the IHS 1989
estimates, since  the $89 million
gathered  in supplemental needs
were developed based upon those
estimates.
Supplemental TnHian Needs

EPA identified  $89  million  in
supplemental   wastewater
treatment and collection needs for
Indian Tribes,  as shown in Table
5.  These needs reflect increases
and/or  decreases  to  the  IHS
reported needs as  well as newly
identified   needs.     The
supplemental needs were derived
by  subtracting   the   needs
documented by the  IHS from
those supplied by other sources.

Of the $89 million, the  largest
increment is in  Alaska at $26.8
million. The smallest increments
are  found  in  the  Aberdeen,
Oklahoma   City,  and  Phoenix
Areas, with less than $2  million
each. No supplemental needs were
identified  for the Tucson  Area.

The  dollar   base   for   these
supplemental estimates could not
be readily determined and is not
reported.
                 A honey bucket disposal point at a tundra pond in an Alaskan village.
                                                     19

-------
How Are the Indian
Needs Distributed?

Figure 3 presents a geographical
distribution  of the  documented
IHS reported needs by IHS Area.
The major portion, 74 percent, of
the  needs  is  concentrated  in
Alaska, while needs in the Navajo
and Oklahoma City Areas are the
next highest at 5 percent each.

Figure 4 shows the geographical
distribution of the $89 million in
supplemental  Indian  needs.
Again, approximately half of these
additional needs are for projects in
the  Alaska  and  Albuquerque
Areas. Supplemental needs  are
lowest in the Aberdeen, Oklahoma
City, and  Phoenix Areas, at  less
than 2 percent each, while  needs
in  the  Tucson  Area  did  not
change.
                         FIGURE 3
                 DISTRIBUTION OF 1989 IHS
                INDIAN NEEDS BY IHS AREA
                     (1989 Dollars In Millions)
Total IHS Needs = $633 Million (1989 Dollars)

NOTE: Estimates In this figure may vary slightly from
     those In other sections of this report due to rounding.
                                                              FIGURE 4
                                                  DISTRIBUTION OF SUPPLEMENTAL
                                                      INDIAN NEEDS BY IHS AREA
                                                            (Dollars In Millions)
                                      Total Supplemental Needs = $89 Million
                                      NOTE: Estimates In this figure may vary slightly from
                                           those In other sections of this report due to rounding.
                                            20

-------
How Have the
Indian Needs
Changed?

Table 6  shows a comparison of
how the documented Indian needs
changed from the 1988 assessment.
The documented needs  in  this
assessment  more  than  double
those reported in 1988, with an
increase  of  approximately $363
million.   The majority  of the
change is due to a six-fold increase
in the needs reported for Alaska.
All other IHS Areas  remained
constant  or had relatively modest
increases in needs.   The largest
decrease  in   needs  is  in  the
Oklahoma  City Area, with  a
decrease of more than 50 percent
because  of  revised   planning or
needs that were met.

The $363 million increase in needs
is due  mainly to a change in the
criteria  used by IHS  to  report
needs,  as  explained  previously.
This change  in  criteria had the
most significant impact  in Alaska,
where  needs  reported by IHS
increased from $69 million to $468
million.  The increase is also due
to  major  new  construction  in
Alaska, as most of  the systems
currently in use are pit privies and
honey  bucket haul systems.   In
estimating   these   needs  IHS
assumed  that  most  of  these
systems would be replaced with
indoor plumbing and centralized
wastewater treatment, but did not
evaluate the practicality, economic
feasibility,   or  public   health
improvement  of the  proposed
projects.
TABLES

COMPARISON OF 1988 AND 1989 DOCUMENTED INDIAN NEEDS
(Nominal Dollars in Millions)
1988 EPA
IHS AREA ASSESSMENT , .
Aberdeen 10
Alaska 69
Albuquerque 18
Bernini 9
Billings 3
California 5
Nashville 29
(East Coast)
Navajo 33
Oklahoma City 61
Phoenix 16
Portland 13
Tucson 4
Total 27*
* IHS 1990 assessment shows a need of $578.0 million.

ASSESSMENT*
M
4«8
*
9
2
'•"*•-.
•, -• '2S :: - • ' .

H
30
."•»'•
; 8
. • 14 ' •' -
*33

                                                    21

-------
Indian  Needs
Assessment
Methodology
What Is the
Methodology?

A  major   objective   of   this
assessment  was to  obtain needs
estimates   for  all   Tribes,
particularly those not identified in
the 1988 assessment.  EPA used
IHS's 1989 needs estimates as the
foundation  for  this assessment.
Indian Tribes and Alaska Native
Villages  were  contacted   and
provided an opportunity to review
IHS's  data   to  identify
supplemental needs.  In  addition,
a  special  effort was made  to
contact all Tribes, particularly in
Alaska and California, where data
were thought to be incomplete.
However, EPA did  not  require
documentation   for   these
supplemental estimates.

As part of  the effort to  identify
supplemental needs, a number of
other sources were consulted to
assist EPA in identifying all Indian
Tribes with  needs.  These sources
included  the   EPA  Regional
offices,  IHS  Area  offices,  the
Bureau  of  Indian Affairs,  the
California Department of Housing
and Community Development, and
the   Alaska   Department   of
Environmental Conservation.
                                What Are the Data
                                Sources?

                                EPA relied on data provided by
                                two major sources.  First,  EPA
                                used the information contained in
                                the   IHS   1989  Sanitation
                                Deficiencies System (SDS) as the
                                foundation for the  1990 Indian
                                Needs  Assessment.    The  IHS
                                estimates were derived mainly
                                through  field   visits  and
                                consultation  with  Tribes,  while
                                sanitary surveys  and  feasibility
                                studies were also used. The needs
                                are based on  projects  that are
                                considered eligible for funding by
                                IHS.

                                Second, EPA relied on estimates
                                of supplemental needs  submitted
                                directly by  the Tribes.  Needs
                                provided directly by the Tribes
                                were included in the assessment,
                                and follow-up  phone calls  were
                                made to some Tribes  to obtain
                                cost  estimates, where necessary.
                                                  23

-------
Glossary
                              NOTE:

                              Definitions are provided to help the reader understand the terms
                              used, but are not necessarily to  be used for legal purposes.
                                          25

-------
Glossary
See Categories of Needs, Category II.

Categories of Needs
Needs estimates address the following categories:

1)      Secondary Treatment (Category I)
        The minimum level of treatment that must be maintained by all
        treatment facilities,   except  those facilities  granted  ocean
        discharge waivers under Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act.
        Treatment levels are specified in terms of the concentration of
        conventional  pollutants in the wastewater  discharged from a
        facility.  Secondary treatment requires an 85-percent reduction in
        conventional pollutant concentrations in the wastewater treated
        by a facility.  Needs reported in this category are necessary to
        attain secondary treatment.  Needs  to  attain incremental
        reductions  in conventional  pollutant  concentrations beyond
        secondary treatment requirements are included in Category II.

2)      Advanced Treatment (Category II)
        A level  of treatment more stringent than secondary treatment.
        Advanced treatment requires greater than 85-percent reduction
        in conventional  pollutants,  or   a significant  reduction  in
        nonconventional pollutants present in the wastewater treated by
        a facility. Needs reported in this category are necessary to attain
        incremental reductions in pollutant concentrations beyond basic
        secondary treatment.

3)      Infiltration/Inflow Correction (Category IIIA)
        Control of the problem of penetration into  a sewer system of
        water other than wastewater from the ground through such
        means as defective pipes or manholes (infiltration) or  from
        sources  such as drains, storm sewers, and other improper entries
        into the system (inflow).  Included in this  category are costs for
        correction of sewer system infiltration/inflow problems.  Costs
        also are reported for preliminary sewer system analysis and for
        detailed sewer system evaluation surveys.

4)      Replacement/Rehabilitation of Sewers (Category IIIB)
        Reinforcement  or  reconstruction of structurally deteriorating
        sewers.  This category includes cost estimates for rehabilitation
        of existing sewer systems beyond those for normal maintenance.
        Costs are reported if the corrective actions are necessary to
        maintain the structural integrity of the system.

5)      Collector Sewers (Category IVA)
        Pipes used to collect and carry wastewater from an individual
        source to an interceptor sewer that will convey the wastewater to
        a treatment  facility.   This  category  includes  the costs  of
        constructing new collector sewer systems and appurtenances.

6)      Interceptor Sewers (Category IVB)
        Major sewer lines receiving wastewater  flows  from collector
        sewers.  The interceptor sewer carries wastewater directly to the
        treatment plant or to another interceptor. This category includes
                                                       27

-------
        costs  for  constructing new  interceptor sewers  and pumping
        stations necessary for conveying wastewater from collector sewer
        systems to treatment facilities or to another interceptor.

7)      Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO) (Category V)
        A discharge of a mixture of stormwater and domestic wastes that
        occurs when the flow capacity of a sewer  system is exceeded
        during a rainstorm.  Costs reported are for facilities to prevent
        or  control periodic bypassing of untreated wastes from sewers
        that convey  a combination of wastewater  and stormwater to
        achieve water quality objectives. This category does not include
        costs for overflow control allocable to flood control or drainage
        improvement, or  for treatment or control of stormwater in
        separate storm and drainage systems.

Collector Sewers
See Categories of Needs, Category IVA.

Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO)
See Categories of Needs, Category V.

Conveyance Needs
The  cost estimate to construct, expand, or upgrade sewer  systems for
transporting wastewater to treatment plants.

Current Needs
The  cost estimate for building  publicly owned wastewater treatment
facilities to serve the existing population eligible for Federal financial
assistance under the Clean Water Act.

Design Year Needs
The  cost estimate for building  publicly owned wastewater treatment
facilities to serve the design year population eligible for Federal financial
assistance under the  Clean Water Act.  The design year represents an
approximate 20-year projection  of the design life for facilities in the
Needs Survey. Design year needs include current needs as a subset.

Facilities Plans
Plans and studies  that directly relate to the construction of treatment
works necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act.  A facilities plan
investigates needs and provides information on the cost effectiveness of
alternatives. A recommended plan and an environmental assessment of
the recommendations are also presented in a facilities plan.

A facilities plan includes a description of the treatment works for which
construction drawings  and  specifications are to  be prepared.   The
description includes  preliminary  engineering  data, cost  estimates for
design and construction  of  the  treatment works, and a schedule for
completion of design and construction.

Honey Bucket Haul System
Any one of a variety of basic "sewer systems" widely used in Alaska Native
Villages where a bucket serves as a toilet in a house without plumbing.
Plastic garbage bags are used as a liner for the bucket. Disposal methods
         28

-------
for contents of the bags may include:  hand carrying filled bags to  a
bunker, tundra pond, lagoon, or landfill site for disposal; or transporting
wastes  by vehicle from centrally  located  honey  bucket  collection
containers to a tundra pond or lagoon.

Indian Needs
The cost estimate for constructing wastewater treatment, collection, and
disposal facilities for Indian  Tribes and Alaska Native Villages.

Indian Tribe
Any Indian tribe, band, group, or community recognized by the Secretary
of the Interior and exercising governmental authority  over a  Federal
Indian reservation, as defined by section 518(h) (2) of the Clean Water
Act.  This includes Tribes that currently reside on former  reservation
lands in Oklahoma and Alaska Native Villages, as amended by the Indian
Reorganization Act (P.L. 100-581)  in November 1988.

Infiltration/Inflow Correction
See  Categories of Needs, Category IIIA.

Interceptor Sewers
See  Categories of Needs, Category IVB.

Lagoon
A pond in which algae, sunlight, and oxygen interact to restore wastewater
to a quality  that  is often  equal to  the effluent from the  secondary
treatment stage.  Lagoons  are widely used  by small communities to
provide wastewater treatment.

Need
The cost estimate for constructing publicly owned wastewater treatment
facilities that are potentially eligible for Federal financial assistance under
the Clean Water Act.

Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
Documented cost estimates for the seven categories of needs for publicly
owned wastewater treatment  facilities.  These needs were  derived by
adjusting  the  1988 documented needs estimates for grants  and loans
awarded between 1988 and 1990 and inflating the costs to January 1990
dollars. These needs are limited to the costs eligible for Federal financial
assistance under Title II of the Clean Water Act.

New State Revolving Fund Eligibilities
The 1987 Amendments to the Clean Water Act  allow State Revolving
Funds (SRF)  to fund  certain activities that were ineligible  under the
Construction Grants program. These new eligibilities  include certain
nonpoint  source pollution control, ground-water protection, estuarine
protection, and wetlands protection activities.

1)      Estuarine Protection
        Activities necessary to develop and implement  Comprehensive
        Conservation  and Management Plans for protecting estuaries
        under the National Estuary Program  and  eligible for  SRF
                    29

-------
^%|-^_ _^—_ _                      funding.  Estuarine protection activities focus on restoru^
^3 HJ O v OI y                      maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of ti
                                          estuary, and controlling nonpoint sources of pollution.

                                  2)      Ground-Water Protection
                                          Activities addressed in a State's ground-water protection strategy
                                          which must be a part of the nonpoint source management
                                          program under Section 319(i) of the Clean Water Act to build
                                          State institutional capabilities to protect ground-water resources
                                          from nonpoint sources of contamination.   Activities include
                                          research, planning, ground-water  assessments, demonstrations,
                                          enforcement,  technical assistance,   education, and   training.
                                          Wellhead protection and underground injection control for Class
                                          V  wells,  as well as water conservation programs,  may  be
                                          included.

                                  3)      Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
                                          Activities to develop and implement an EPA-approved State
                                          nonpoint source  management program.   Nonpoint source
                                          pollution does not result from a discharge at a specific, single
                                          location (such as a single pipe) but normally results from land
                                          runoff, precipitation, atmospheric deposition or percolation. This
                                          may include needs for stormwater runoff, but  not if ultimately
                                          discharged via a separate storm sewer. Also, needs for nonpoint
                                          source  pollution control  do not include costs that have been
                                          distributed  in the categories for  ground-water, estuaries,  and
                                          wetlands.

                                  4)      Stormwater Control
                                          Activities  to   plan   and  implement  municipal  stormwater
                                          management programs pursuant to National Pollutant Discharge
                                          Elimination System  (NPDES) permits  for  discharges from
                                          municipal separate storm sewer systems. This includes structural
                                          and non-structural measures that:  1) reduce pollutants from
                                          runoff from commercial and residential areas that are discharged
                                          from the storm sewer, 2) detect and remove illicit discharges and
                                          improper disposal into storm sewers, 3) monitor pollutants in
                                          runoff  from  industrial facilities  that discharge to municipal
                                          separate storm sewers, and 4) reduce pollutants in construction
                                          site runoff  that discharge to municipal separate storm sewers.
                                          This includes the control of stormwater pollution from diffuse or
                                          nonpoint sources  that are ultimately discharged via  a  storm
                                          sewer.

                                  5)      Wetlands Protection
                                          Activities to protect and restore wetlands that are an integral
                                          part  of a nonpoint source management program or part of
                                          implementation or  development of  comprehensive estuary
                                          conservation and management plans.

                                  Primary Treatment
                                  The first stage of wastewater treatment,  including removal of floating
                                  debris and solids by screening and sedimentation.
                                           30

-------
f\ I _ _   _ r^                Replacement/Rehabilitation of Sewers
\J IOSS9 ly               See Categories of Needs, Category IIIB.
                                   Reserve Capacity
                                   Extra treatment capacity built into treatment plants  and interceptor
                                   sewers to accommodate flow increases due to future population growth.

                                   Secondary Treatment
                                   See Categories of Needs, Category I.

                                   Separate State Estimates
                                   Needs that were not included in the 1988 EPA estimates because these
                                   needs  were justified  with documents outside  the  EPA-established
                                   documentation criteria or had no written documentation.

                                   State Revolving Fund
                                   Revolving funds are financial institutions  that make loans for specific
                                   water pollution control purposes and  use loan repayments, including
                                   interest, to make  new  loans  for  additional water pollution control
                                   activities.  Under the State Revolving Fund (SRF) program, States and
                                   municipalities will be primarily responsible for financing, constructing, and
                                   managing wastewater treatment facilities. The SRF program is based on
                                   the 1987 Amendments to the Clean Water Act which called for a phase-
                                   out  of the Construction Grants program and the initiation of the SRF
                                   program.

                                   Supplemental State Estimates
                                   Cost estimates  that supplement the EPA's estimate of needs for the
                                   traditional eligibilities. These estimates include costs that are now eligible
                                   for funding under the State Revolving Fund program under Title VI of
                                   the Clean Water Act such as costs for reserve capacity, revised planning
                                   and/or design, and  new needs.

                                   Treatment Facility
                                   A structure constructed to treat wastewater prior to discharging to the
                                   environment. Treatment is accomplished by subjecting the wastewater to
                                   a combination of physical,  chemical, and/or biological processes that
                                   reduce the concentration of contaminants in the wastewater.

                                   Wastewater
                                   Dissolved or suspended waterborne waste material. Sanitary or domestic
                                   wastewater refers to liquid material collected from residences, offices, and
                                   institutions. Municipal wastewater is a general term applied to any liquid
                                   treated in a municipal treatment facility.   Industrial  wastes  refer to
                                   wastewater from manufacturing facilities.

                                   Wastewater Infrastructure
                                   The plan or network for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage
                                   in a community. The level of treatment will depend upon the size of the
                                   community, the type of discharge,  and/or  the  designated use of the
                                   receiving water.
                                                      31

-------
Appendices
                       These Appendices contain lists of documentation types and
                       State and national summaries of various cost data. Appendix
                       A contains a summary of the types of documentation used for
                       the 1988 and 1990 Needs Surveys. Appendix B presents cost
                       data from the 1990 Needs Survey, including summaries by State
                       of  Current  and Design Year Needs  for  the  Traditional
                       Eligibilities, Supplemental State Estimates, and the combined
                       totals.   Appendix C contains a summary of the  1988 needs
                       estimates by State.
                                         33

-------
List of Appendix
Tables
                                                                        Page
                  Appendix A:  Summary of 1988 and 1990 Needs Survey
                              Documentation

                  A-l   Documentation Types for Supplemental              A-3
                        State Estimates (1990 Needs Survey)

                  A-2   Documentation Types (1988 Needs Survey)           A-5
                  Appendix B:  Summary of 1990 Needs Survey Estimates

                  B-l   Total for the Traditional Eligibilities                 B-3
                        and the Supplemental State Estimates

                  B-2   Current Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities         B-5

                  B-3   Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities     B-7

                  B-4   Design Year Supplemental State Estimates            B-9


                  Appendix C:  Summary of 1988 Needs Survey Estimates

                  C-l   Current Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities         C-3

                  C-2   Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities     C-5
                                         35

-------
Appendix A:  Summary of 1988  and 1990
            Needs Survey Documentation
                    A-l

-------
                                    Table A-l

                                1990 Needs Survey
               Documentation Types for Supplemental State Estimates
Table  A-l lists the 27  suggested documentation types  for  reporting a  need as  a
Supplemental State Estimate in the 1990 Needs Survey. The suggested documentation types
expand upon documentation used in the 1988 Survey, and address needs eligible under the
State Revolving Fund program.
                                  A-2

-------
                                           Table A-l
                                       1990 Needs Survey
                  Documentation Types for Supplemental State Estimates
               Documentation Type
        1.     Capital Improvement Plan
        2.     Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) Analysis
        3.     Sewer System Evaluation Survey
        4.     Final Engineer Estimate
        5.     Cost of Previous Comparable Construction
        6.     Facilities Plan
        7.     Plan of Study
        8.*    State Priority List/Intended Use Plan
        9.     State-Approved  Area-Wide  or Regional Basin Plan  with Project-Specific Information
               (Examples: Plans Required by Sections 208 or 303 of the CWA)
        10.*   Grant or Loan Application Form
        11.    Municipal Compliance Plan
        12.    Diagnostic Evaluation Results of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants Demonstrating Need
               for Construction
        13.    Administrative Order/Court Order/Consent Decree Demonstrating Need to Construct
        14.    Sanitary Survey (documenting high failure rates)
        15.    State-Approved Local/County Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan with Project-Specific
               Information
        16.    State Certification of Excessive Flow (Preliminary I/I Study)
        17.    State-Approved Municipal Wasteload Allocation Plan with Project-Specific Information
        18.    For EPA Use Only
        19.    Full Grant Award
        20.    Partial Grant Award
        21.*   NPDES or State Permit Requiring Corrective Action (with schedule)
        22.*   Municipal Stormwater Management Plan
        23.*   Nonpoint Source Management Plan/Assessment Report
        24.*   Ground-Water Protection Strategy/NPS Report
        25.*   Wellhead Protection Program and Plan
        26.*   Delegated Underground Injection  Control Program and Plan
        27.*   Estuary Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan

* Indicates minimal documentation for SRF eligibilities as recommended by 1990 Needs Survey workgroup.
                                                   A-3

-------
                                    Table A-2

                                1988 Needs Survey
                              Documentation Types
Table A-2 lists the 17 acceptable criteria for documenting a problem or a cost estimate in
the 1988 Needs Survey. These same documentation types were used for the 1986 Survey.
                                   A-4

-------
                                    Table A-2
                               1988 Needs Survey
                             Documentation Types
        Documentation Type
1.       Capital Improvement Plan
2.       Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) Analysis
3.       Sewer System Evaluation Survey
4.       Final Engineer Estimate
5.       Cost of Previous Comparable Construction
6.       Facilities Plan
7.       Plan of Study
8.       State Priority List
9.       State-Approved  Area-Wide  or  Regional Basin  Plan  with Project-Specific  Information
        (Examples: Plans Required by Sections 208 and 303 of the CWA)
10.      Grant Application Form (Step 3 or 4)
11.      Municipal Compliance Plan
12.      Diagnostic Evaluation Results of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants Demonstrating Need
        for Construction
13.      Administrative Order/Court Order/Consent Decree
14.      Sanitary Survey (documenting high failure rates)
15.      State-Approved Local/County Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan with Project-Specific
        Information
16.      State Certification of Excessive Flow (Preliminary I/I Study)
17.      State-Approved Municipal Wasteload Allocation Plan with Project-Specific Information
18.      For EPA Use Only
19.      Full Grant Award
20.      Partial Grant Award
                                            A-5

-------
Appendix B:  Summary of 1990 Needs Survey
            Estimates
                    B-l

-------
                                     Table B-l

                                 1990 Needs Survey
       Total for the Traditional Eligibilities and the Supplemental State Estimates
Table B-l summarizes the cost estimates for the traditional eligibilities and the supplemental
estimates presented by the States.  The estimates reflect the sum of Tables B-3 and B-4.
                                    B-2

-------
                                                Table B-l
                                            1990 Needs Survey
                Total for the Traditional Eligibilities and the Supplemental State Estimates
                                    (January 1990 Dollars in Millions)

State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Northern Marianas
Puerto Rico
Republic of Palau
Virgin Islands
TOTAL

I
280
71
601
289
7798
60
556
18
103
2384
303
995
75
571
262
172
195
269
473
119
224
2590
832
601
202
404
52
69
442
137
2056
41
3703
417
7
863
172
479
606
70
368
46
880
2204
401
88
779
1045
572
531
16
4
31
25
59
21
636
15
10
37292

II
146
0
85
90
127
43
1291
2
186
820
368
4
9
344
150
500
101
88
33
1
917
22
9
34
76
24
2
2
137
25
202
0*
1988
1014
0
418
103
150
115
29
86
3
108
715
67
54
306
24
52
199
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
11274


Category of Design
IIIA IIIB
96
5
2
138
526
2
26
0
0
44
45
0
12
87
58
49
70
78
61
26
124
42
74
35
63
10
0
2
2
23
245
1
198
110
0
320
13
108
17
15
26
5
194
246
40
1
96
136
29
47
1
0
0*
0
0
0
38
0
0'
3586
24
0
3
102
826
7
17
0
0
25
42
0
3
60
30
1
53
12
35
7
3
19
40
40
2
283
1
16
4
12
336
16
1514
76
4
102
12
196
6
14
0
6
23
110
4
4
38
83
28
1
2
0
0
0
0*
0*
15
0
0
4257

Year Need
IVA
248
20
52
152
514
3
346
37

-------
                                     Table B-2

                                 1990 Needs Survey
                    Current Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
Table B-2 summarizes the EPA 1990 cost estimates of needs for the traditional eligibilities
(Categories I through V) by State for the current population.  All values are given in
millions of January 1990 dollars.

The current needs represent the capital investment necessary to build all needed publicly
owned wastewater treatment facilities to  serve  the current population and meet the
requirements of the Clean Water Act.  These needs include all planning, design,  and
construction activities eligible for Federal financial assistance under Title n of the Clean
Water Act. These needs are derived from the current needs documented in the 1988 Needs
Survey and do not contain an allowance for future population growth and migration.

Needs estimates presented in Table B-2 may vary  slightly from those presented in Table 1
and 2 due to rounding.
                                    B-4

-------
                                                Table B-2
                                            1990 Needs Survey
                              Current Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
                                    (January 1990 Dollars in Millions)

State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Northern Marianas
Puerto Rico
Republic of Palau
Virgin Islands
TOTAL

I
137
33
284
87
2526
42
261
13
99
839
152
66
14
342
118
135
124
134
330
96
138
2510
746
222
150
214
11
45
54
72
1296
40
1805
254
7
491
59
200
542
17
100
29
266
1268
170
65
194
785
263
169
4
2
16
18
54
11
346
10
7
18482

II
57
0
85
16
26
39
96
2
186
234
82
3
3
273
74
20
2
47
23
1
348
15
5
28
52
0
2
2
17
7
67
0*
181
144
0
315
69
127
98
4
20
3
74
425
33
29
44
19
21
136
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
3559



Category of Design Year Need
HIA IIIB IVA
89
5
2
55
297
2
26
0
0
42
45
0
5
82
46
49
70
81
61
26
32
42
68
17
60
7
0
1
2
9
244
1
171
91
0
284
13
42
17
0*
22
2
161
229
40
1
30
135
23
51
1
0
0*
0
0
0
39
0
0«
2818
19
0
3
1
678
7
17
0«
0
25
25
0
2
41
10
1
53
12
35
7
0«
19
25
1
2
72
1
8
3
5
330
16
1640
46
4
63
12
153
6
0
0
1
10
81
4
4
10
83
16
0
1
0
0
0
0«
0«
15
0
0
3567
112
20
45
28
320
3
299
24
0
2226
54
90
12
95
162
37
42
562
249
50
32
576
392
25
62
40
15
8
12
217
295
8
1227
308
0
556
31
307
507
79
53
8
193
283
17
16
118
213
311
120
0«
5
3
2
10
3
370
0
8
10860

IVB
75
38
113
23
376
28
170
11
0
607
154
45
8
246
100
107
170
273
178
30
59
555
563
30
70
228
2
10
8
124
135
15
868
322
4
736
84
57
130
64
79
12
91
1050
18
17
118
299
163
101
0
2
2
4
3
8
343
0
3
9129

V
0
0
0
0
1082
0
402
1
0
0
83
0
1
1453
982
5
15
24
0
21
9
1783
1166
122
0
145
0
21
0
241
823
0
5962
1
0
589
0
102
118
197
0
2
10
0
0
77
214
579
14
221
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
0
0
16487

TOTAL
489
96
532
210
5305
121
1271
51
285
3973
595
204
45
2532
1492
354
476
1133
876
231
618
5500
2965
445
396
706
31
95
96
675
3190
80
11854
1166
15
3034
268
988
1418
361
274
57
805
3336
282
209
728
2113
811
798
6
9
21
24
67
22
1140
10
18
64902





























































Estimate is less than $0.5 million.
                                                        B-5

-------
                                     Table B-3

                                 1990 Needs Survey
                  Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
Table B-3 summarizes the EPA 1990 cost estimates of needs for the traditional eligibilities
(Categories I through V) by State for the design year population.  All values are given in
millions of January 1990 dollars.

The 1990 design year needs represent the capital investment necessary to build all publicly
owned wastewater treatment facilities to serve the design year population and meet the
requirements of the Clean  Water Act.  These needs include all planning, design,  and
construction activities eligible for funding under Title II of the Clean Water Act.  The
design year needs are derived from those documented during the 1988 Needs Survey.

Needs estimates presented in Table B-3 may vary slightly from those presented in Tables
1, 2, and 3 due to rounding.
                                    B-6

-------
                                                 Table B-3
                                            1990 Needs Survey
                             Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
                                     (January 1990 Dollars in Millions)

State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Northern Marianas
Puerto Rico
Republic of Palau
Virgin Islands
TOTAL

I
186
71
601
135
3386
60
275
18
103
1915
278
119
36
459
152
160
194
181
473
119
152
2570
787
360
199
291
13
60
83
94
1522
41
1884
402
7
627
172
376
606
37
140
31
366
2112
401
66
278
977
300
223
4
4
31
25
59
21
603
15
10
24870

II
77
0
85
21
81
43
119
2
186
450
119
4
9
295
84
23
3
57
33
1
360
22
6
32
63
0
4
2
38
10
80
0"
206
184
0
350
103
136
115
4
28
3
108
691
67
30
83
24
23
193
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
4662

IIIA
89
5
2
55
297
2
26
0
0
42
45
0
5
82
46
49
70
81
61
26
32
42
68
17
60
7
0
1
2
9
244
1
171
91
0
284
13
42
17
0
22
2
161
229
40
1
30
135
23
51
1
0
0«
0
0
0
39
0
0*
2818


Category of Need
IIIB IVA
19
0
3
1
678
7
17
0*
0
25
25
0
2
41
10
1
53
12
35
7
0*
19
25
1
2
72
1
8
3
5
330
16
1640
46
4
63
12
153
6
0
0
1
10
81
4
4
10
83
16
0
1
0
0
0
0*
0*
15
0
0
3567
147
20
52
38
376
3
346
37
0
2481
80
137
17
112
229
41
46
693
330
76
35
738
464
26
82
47
18
9
18
270
376
32
2021
442
0
664
31
343
610
94
65
9
261
362
23
19
141
308
357
158
0
11
8
2
15
5
469
0
8
13802

IVB
177
104
232
34
728
40
201
24
0
1317
346
105
18
292
120
195
341
437
257
34
77
716
635
46
115
391
3
12
20
188
168
28
1050
603
5
878
133
133
151
72
144
14
384
1588
46
17
164
563
192
114
0
3
4
7
5
15
447
1
9
14143

V
0
0
0
0
1082
0
402
1
0
0
83
0
1
1453
982
5
15
24
0
21
9
1783
1166
122
0
145
0
21
0
241
823
0
5962
1
0
589
0
102
118
197
0
2
10
0
0
77
214
579
14
221
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
0
0
16487

TOTAL
695
200
975
284
6628
155
1386
82
289
6230
976
365
88
2734
1623
474
722
1485
1189
284
665
5890
3151
604
521
953
39
113
164
817
3543
118
12934
1769
16
3455
464
1285
1623
404
399
62
1300
5063
581
214
920
2669
925
960
6
18
43
34
79
41
1600
16
27
80349





























































' Estimate is less than $05 million.
                                                        B-7

-------
                                     Table B-4
                                 1990 Needs Survey
                      Design Year Supplemental State Estimates
Table B-4 summarizes  the States' supplemental estimates of incremental needs for the
traditional eligibilities (Categories I through V) for the design year population.  All values
are given in millions of January 1990 dollars.

The supplemental State estimates represent needs which are in addition to the needs for the
traditional eligibilities. These estimates include planning, design, and construction activities
eligible for Federal financial assistance under Title II (Construction grants) and Title VI
(the State Revolving Fund) of the Clean Water Act. These design year estimates address
funds necessary to provide wastewater  treatment facilities for the current population, plus
population growth and migration for the next 20 years.

Needs presented in Table B-4 may vary slightly from those presented in Tables 1 and 4 due
to rounding.
                                    B-8

-------
                                                Table B-4
                                            1990 Needs Survey
                                Design Year Supplemental State Estimates
                                    (January 1990 Dollars in Millions)

State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Northern Marianas
Puerto Rico
Republic of Palau
Virgin Islands
TOTAL

I
94
0
0
154
4412
0
281
0
0
469
25
876
39
112
110
12
1
88
0
0'
72
20
45
241
3
113
39
9
359
43
534
0
1819
15
0
236
0
103
0
33
228
15
514
92
0
22
501
68
272
308
12
0
0
0
0
0
33
0
0
12422

n
69
0
0
69
46
0
1172
0
0
370
249
0
0
49
66
477
98
31
0
0
557
0
3
2
13
24
(2)
0
99
15
122
0
1782
830
0
68
0
14
0
25
58
0
0*
24
0
24
223
0*
29
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6612

IIIA
7
0
0
83
229
0
0
0
0
2
0*
0
7
5
12
0
0*
(3)
0
0
92
0
6
18
3
3
0
1
0*
14
1
0
27
19
0
36
0
66
0
15
4
3
33
17
0
0*
66
1
6
(4)
0
0
0
0
0
0
(1)
0
0
768


Category of Need
IIIB IVA
5
0
0
101
148
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
1
19
20
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
15
39
0
211
0*
8
1
7
6
0
(126)
30
0
39
0
43
0
14
0
5
13
29
0
0
28
0*
12
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
690
101
0
0
114
138
0
0
0
0
261
17
30
45
30
27
2
0
86
0
0'
179
0
66
89
6
81
21
(5)
4
24
52
0
497
103
0
173
0
55
0
16
30
6
50
110
0
17
132
3
527
71
1
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
3170

IVB
50
0
0
101
66
0
0
0
0
187
58
75
57
53
34
0«
0
86
0
4
219
0
14
38
2
61
17
4
50
19
107
0
383
292
0
244
0
51
0
5
55
(4)
22
260
0
1
118
31
273
222
1
0
0
0
0
0
42
0
0
3299

V
0
0
0
2
594
0
0
0
73
2
121
0
0
88
17
0
0
8
0
793
6
0
242
49
0
24
0
0
0
32
326
0
405
0
0
87
0
13
0
33
0
0
220
0
0
(16)
255
3
7
(148)
0
0
0
0
0
0
(3)
0
0
3233

TOTAL
326
0
0
625
5633
0
1453
0
73
1291
487
981
149
356
286
491
99
296
0
797
1128
20
391
476
27
517
75
17
513
154
1148
0
4787
1289
0
883
0
345
0
141
375
25
852
532
0
48
1323
106
1126
456
15
0
0
0
0
0
82
0
0
30194





























































* Estimate is less than $0.5 million.
                                                       B-9

-------
Appendix C: Summary of 1988 Needs Survey
            Estimates
                    C-l

-------
                                      Table C-l

                                  1988 Needs Survey
                      Current Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
Table C-l summarizes the results of EPA's 1988 Needs Survey for the current population.  All
values are given in millions of January 1990 dollars.  This table is provided as a convenience
to those who wish to compare the 1988 and 1990 Survey results. Table C-l may be compared
with Table B-2.
                                       C-2

-------
                                                  Table C-l
                                             1988 Needs Survey
                                Current Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
                                      (January 1990 Dollars in Millions)

State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Northern Marianas
Puerto Rico
Republic of Palau
Virgin Islands
TOTAL

I
175
48
309
123
2571
58
280
41
99
943
176
100
29
376
191
230
127
143
334
131
174
2565
825
334
162
442
18
52
57
108
1435
56
1906
275
16
600
80
219
593
17
175
52
353
1324
180
65
235
900
287
533
8
4
16
18
55
11
353
10
7
21004

II
69
0
85
21
27
69
106
2
186
262
93
3
3
273
106
53
2
52
23
1
411
15
29
53
53
1
2
2
23
7
174
0*
181
191
0
330
76
128
101
4
24
3
76
432
33
29
47
19
22
147
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
4054

IIIA
96
5
2
58
373
2
26
0
0
44
46
0
5
84
50
52
86
81
62
26
41
42
71
20
66
11
o-
1
2
9
249
1
171
91
0
289
13
46
17
0
22
3
162
255
40
1
31
135
23
58
1
0
0*
0
0
0
39
0
0*
3008

Category
IIIB
19
0
3
4
679
7
17
0*
0
25
27
0
3
41
10
2
58
12
35
11
0*
19
27
173
2
73
10
8
3
5
332
16
1647
47
11
63
12
153
9
V
0
2
19
83
4
4
10
83
18
3
2
0
0
0
0*
0*
15
0
0
3806

of Need
IVA
121
20
49
32
354
4
299
27
0
2236
59
96
16
95
198
40
44
566
255
60
51
597
400
27
64
56
20
8
12
218
313
8
1232
313
0
587
31
308
520
79
79
10
221
290
25
17
125
215
347
137
1
5
3
2
10
4
395
0
8
11309

IVB
89
39
117
30
382
29
182
14
0
631
157
46
10
247
108
149
171
274
180
49
213
642
724
103
78
262
10
11
8
149
159
15
1023
342
7
789
84
60
133
64
159
12
96
1056
21
17
123
299
175
145
5
2
2
4
4
11
362
1
3
10277

V
0
0
0
0
1082
0
407
1
0
2
83
0
1
1758
982
5
15
24
0
21
9
1783
1174
227
0
149
0«
21
0
241
823
0
5992
1
0
608
0
106
124
215
0
2
10
0
0
77
214
579
14
231
0
0
2
0
0
0
22
0
0
17005

Total
569
112
565
268
5468
169
1317
85
285
4143
641
245
67
2874
1645
531
503
1152
889
299
899
5663
3250
937
425
994
60
103
105
737
3485
96
12152
1260
34
3266
296
1020
1497
379
459
84
937
3440
303
210
785
2230
886
1254
17
11
21
24
69
26
1191
11
18
70463





























































* Estimate is less than $0.5 million.
                                                         C-3

-------
                                      Table C-2

                                  1988 Needs Survey
                    Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
Table C-2 summarizes the results of EPA's 1988 Needs Survey for the design year population.
All values are given in millions of January 1990 dollars. This table is provided as a convenience
to those who wish to compare the 1988 and 1990 Survey results.  Table C-2 may be compared
with Table B-3.

Needs presented in Table C-2  may  vary slightly  from those  presented  in Table 3 due to
rounding.
                                     C-4

-------
                                                Table C-2
                                            1988 Needs Survey
                            Design Year Needs for the Traditional Eligibilities
                                    (January 1990 Dollars in Millions)

State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
American Samoa
Guam
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Northern Marianas
Puerto Rico
Republic of Palau
Virgin Islands
TOTAL

I
242
98
635
197
3438
78
305
50
103
2039
319
177
67
494
233
267
198
193
493
155
190
2627
878
506
226
535
22
67
87
135
1697
57
1985
424
18
754
195
401
664
38
271
56
498
2173
413
67
328
1096
327
605
9
6
31
25
60
21
610
15
10
27908

II
96
0
85
27
82
72
133
2
186
485
134
4
9
295
118
57
3
62
33
1
424
35
32
67
67
1
5
2
43
10
207
0*
206
232
0
374
109
137
117
4
34
3
109
699
67
30
87
24
24
206
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
5244

IIIA
96
5
2
58
373
2
26
0
0
44
46
0
5
84
50
52
86
81
62
26
41
42
71
20
66
11
0
1
2
9
249
1
171
91
0
289
13
46
17
0*
22
3
162
255
40
1
31
135
23
58
1
0
0*
0
0
0
39
0
0*
3008


Category of Need
IIIB IVA
19
0
3
4
679
7
17
0
0
25
27
0
3
41
10
2
58
12
35
11
0
19
27
173
2
73
10
8
3
5
332
16
1647
47
11
63
12
153
9
0
0
2
19
83
4
4
10
83
18
3
2
0
0
0
0*
o-
15
0
0
3806
158
20
57
48
413
4
346
45
0
2493
85
143
23
112
269
44
48
697
336
87
58
760
474
29
84
70
24
9
18
271
400
32
2026
449
0
699
31
345
623
94
103
10
291
371
32
20
152
311
402
187
2
11
8
2
15
6
495
0
8
14350

IVB
202
108
237
52
734
41
214
34
0
1346
352
106
21
292
128
245
341
445
279
54
232
803
797
128
124
434
13
12
20
218
195
28
1206
627
7
936
134
136
155
72
283
14
438
1594
49
17
172
564
207
166
5
3
4
7
6
25
470
1
9
15542

V
0
0
0
0
1082
0
407
1
0
2
83
0
1
1758
982
5
15
24
0
21
9
1783
1174
227
0
149
0'
21
0
241
823
0
5992
1
0
608
0
106
124
215
0
2
10
0
0
77
214
579
14
231
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
0
0
17003

Total
813
231
1019
386
6801
204
1448
132
289
6434
1046
430
129
3076
1790
672
749
1514
1238
355
954
6069
3453
1150
569
1273
74
120
173
889
3903
134
13233
1871
36
3723
494
1324
1709
423
713
90
1527
5175
605
216
994
2792
1015
1456
19
20
43
34
81
52
1656
16
27
86861





























































1 Estimate is less than $0.5 million.
                                                       C-5

-------