.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WASTEWATER MANAGE
OWM Accomplishments Report
-------
Message from the Director
December 31,2006
I'm pleased to present the Fiscal Year 2006 Performance Re-
port. This report is an overview of the Office of Wastewater
Management's (OWM) programmatic performance during FY
2006. It highlights some of the more significant initiatives and
achievements for the year.
With the help of our partners, including state and local govern-
ments, tribes and non-government organizations, OWM
management has made great progress in meeting the goals of
the Office of Water and the EPA.
I would like to personally thank Jane Moore, former OWM
Deputy Director for her leadership, foresight and exemplary
service to this Office. Her sage advice and direction are
reflected in many of the results highlighted in this report.
Jim Hanlon
Director
Office of Wastewater Management
-------
f 1i iMi t fhx
1 :i: :Q:!Jt ; © I jOO00QOQ00OOOq0OOO0Q00000ooOQ o o oo o0 oo
©
.E 11I
fl° 0 000 1
ll 1I
OO OOII
-------
- It J’ ,
\ L
I r
i, * 1
‘
c1,Jt 1
j
r
1 ‘
-------
About the Office of Wastewater Management
Cleaning and protecting the nation’s water from the effects
of pollution is an enormous task. The Office of Wastewater
Management (OWM) and its staff of more than 120 employ-
ees embrace that challenge by promoting effective and re-
sponsible water use, treatment, disposal and management,
and by encouraging the protection and restoration of water-
sheds. OWM implements a wide range of programs contrib-
uting to public health and to the well-being of the nation’s
waters and watersheds.
Remarkably, OWM accounts for more than $1.4 billion or
nearly one-fifth of the EPA’s Budget. Through its programs o t j Jt iI ©1U
and initiatives, OWM promotes compliance with the require-
ments of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Under the CWA,
OWM works in partnership with EPA’s regions, states, local
governments and tribes to regulate point source discharges
into surface waters such as wetlands, lakes, rivers, estuar-
ies, bays and oceans. The office helps finance water quality
protection projects for wastewater treatment, nonpoint
source pollution control, and watershed and estuary man-
agement. OWM is committed to helping ensure that our Na-
tion’s water resources will be available for future genera-
tions.
o
Organ zat on and Leadership
o —
Office of Wastewater Management
James A. Han/on, Director
Judy S. Davis, Deputy Director ©i •$IJiil 3
Planning, Information & Resources Management Staff
Len Bechtel, Director
Municipal Support Division
Sheila Frace, Director
Sylvia Bell, Deputy Director
Municipal Assistance Branch - Benjamin Hamm, Chief
Municipal Technology Branch - Phil Zahreddine, Chief
State Revolving Fund Branch - George Ames, Chief
Water Permits Division
Linda Boornazian, Director
Elaine Brenner, Associate Director
State/Regional Branch - Tom Laverty, Chief
Municipal Branch - Donald Brady, Chief
Rural Branch - Allison Wiedeman, Chief
Industrial Branch - Deborah Nagle, Chief
5
-------
How We Do Our Work
OWM pridei itself on j
the fiscal and scientific
integrity of its staff,
programs and
research.
I
OWM consists of an Immediate Office of the Director, the Water
Permits Division (WPD), the Municipal Support Division (MSD)
and the Planning, Information and Resources Management Staff
(PIRMS).
MSD conducts activities related to the national management of
the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) programs,
assistance to small communities and Indian tribes,and special
appropriations acts (including Colonias and Alaska Native Vil-
lages). The division also maintains and regularly updates inven-
tories and cost estimates of existing and needed future municipal
wastewater treatment works and capital investments to meet the
goals of the CWA.
________________ WPD provides national program direction to the National Pollut-
ant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit,
pretreatment, and sewage
sludge management pro-
grams under sections 401,
402, and 405 of the Clean
Water Act, including: devel-
opment of regulations, policy
and guidance, development
of national strategies, imple-
mentation management,
compliance assurance and
overview of regional and
State operations. The Divi-
sion also coordinates with
the Office of Science and
Technology (OST) in the
development of national
standards for point source
controls, indirect dischargers,
and sludge use and disposal.
• State & Regional
Cross-cutting Strategies
• State&Tnbal
Capacity Building • External Stakeholder Relationships
• Industrial • Internal Stakeholder Relationships
• Research
• Sustainat e • Information Technology / Administrative Processes
Communities
• Measures
• OWM Resources and
Communication
Efficiency.. .
Through strategic plan-
ning, prioritizing and
establishing realistic
goals, OWM has a suc-
cessful track record of
delivering impressive
results.
Results...
41
Setting realistic goals
and reaching or sur-
passing those goals is
the cornerstone of
OWM’s strategic plan.
The program has nine
distinct results areas
that support the overall
mission of the Office.
Results Areas
• Clean Water State
Revolving Fund
• Rural
• Sustainable
Infrastructure
• Wet Weather /
Stormwater
I
6
-------
IHI ghligbts 2006 ResWt
• Issued (nationally) approximately 98% of Priority Permits
targeted for FY06. OWM has initiated an evaluation of the
environmental significance of the permit selection process,
and will enhance the tracking and priority permit selection
web site.
• Issued a proposed Guidance for Peak Flow Management
at publicly owned wastewater treatment plants served by
separate sanitary sewer systems. The guidance will provide
a framework that enhances environmental protection, con-
siders municipal costs and increases public information.
• Announced the WaterSense voluntary water efficiency pro-
gram that will make it easy for consumers to find products
and services that save water while ensuring product
performance. The program also released its first product
specifications for landscape irrigation professionals.
• Signed a “Statement of Intent” with six major water utility
trade associations in addition to other successful initiatives
under the Sustainable Infrastructure Initiative. Also
signed a memorandum of understanding with the Federal
Highway Administration to jointly pursue asset manage-
ment activities.
• Issued Tribal Water Quality grant guidance that sets
clear expectations for Tribal water quality activities and es-
tablishes key reporting requirements to focus activities on
environmental results.
• Made significant improvements in the management of the
Alaskan Native Village Program resulting in a re-PART
rating of “adequate” based on a score of 56% (up from a
rating of “ineffective” based on a prior score of 31%). With
18 projects the ANV Program provided first-time access to
basic water and sanitation for 3,050 homes.
• Improved linkages of the $55 billion Clean Water State
Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program to the Agency budget
and Strategic plan through completion of a logic model, de-
velopment of improved PART measures under review by
0MB, and voluntary agreement by all 51 State and territory
CWSRF programs to provide environmental benefits infor-
mation to track progress against those measures.
• The NPDES Permit
Program
• Clean Water State
Revolving Fund
(CWSRF)
• Clean Watersheds
Needs Survey
• Sustainable Infra-
structure
• WaterSense — water
efficiency program
• Onsite/Decentralized
Wastewater Systems
Program
.. Innovative Manage-
ment Systems (EMS,
Asset Management,
CMOM, etc.)
• Infrastructure Grants
(Congressional Ear-
marks)
• Outreach, Technical
Assistance, and
Training Programs
• State and Tribal
Program Assistance
(CWA Section 106)
• Small Communities
• U.S./Mexico Border
• Wastewater Treat-
ment Technologies
• Water Quality Coop-
erative Agreements
(104(b)(3))
7
-------
CD an W r Sthth R voOvh Fw d
ft
— Ôïü
u -o
o °:o
—
riiü
—
bii
__ -
A! ji U ix
Ik E t
1j
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF)
programs provided more than $5 billion in 2006
to fund water quality protection projects for
Clean Water wastewater treatment, nonpoint source pollution
lift ‘ \Ll Wid control, and watershed and estuary manage-
ment. CWSRFs have funded over $52 billion, providing over
16,700 low-interest loans to date. CWSRFs offer: low interest
rates, flexible terms; significant funding for nonpoint source pol-
lution control and estuary protection; assistance to a variety of
borrowers; and partnerships with other funding sources.
High Return on Federal Investment
The ratio of CWSRF project disbursements (i.e., total cash out
to pay invoices) compared to total federal outlays for projects
(cash drawn from federal funds) is a measure of return on the
federal investment to date. Currently 2.12, as compared to 2.05
for 2004, the return on federal investment is growing and will
continue to grow due to the revolving nature of the CWSRF
program.
Paying for Sustainable PAYING FOR __________
Water Infrastructure: SUSTAINABLE
Innovations for the WL: FER
21st Century I FRASTR CTURE ______
The program has final-
ized plans for a national conference that will bring together
stakeholders from all levels of government and the private
sector to explore creative methods to pay for sustainable water
infrastructure in addition to the SRF programs. It is the first of its
kind to address the challenge of integrating the many diverse
tools and strategies to pay for sustainable water infrastructure.
Extended Finance Policy
EPA reaffirmed the CWSRF Extended Finance Policy in March
2006. The policy allows states td purchase or refinance munici-
pal debt through Clean Water SRF funds with terms exceeding
20 years.
AnnuaH Report
OWM issued its second Annual Report on the CWSRF Program
in February 2006. It provides a brief overview of the program’s
activities and accomplishments during the last fiscal year. The
Report highlighted CWSRF Benefits Reporting, a project that
links CWSRF assistance with Clean Water Act goals. It also rec-
ognizes the innovative ideas of state CWSRF programs, and
includes an update on financial performance.
W i 23,’Oi
_ At1anta, Georgia
8
-------
Ruldi Program
The Rural Program strives to protect and improve water quality
by developing and implementing NPDES programs that target
rural areas and rural populations. The program develops regula-
tions and policies: develops technical implementation guidance
and outreach for EPA Regions, states and the general public.
Significant achievements in 2006 include:
CAFO Rulemaking
EPA issued a proposed rulemaking that revises several parts of
EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
and Effluent Limitation Guidelines for concentrated animal feed-
ing operations (CAFOs) in June. The rulemaking was in re-
sponse to the order issued in Waterkeeper Alliance et al. v. EPA,
(2nd Cir. 2005). The rule furthers the statutory goal of restoring
and maintaining the nation’s water quality and effectively ensur-
ing that CAFOs properly manage manure generated by their op-
erations. Seven public meetings and a webcast with 250 atten-
dees were held to seek comments from interested parties across
the country. More than 1200 comments were received. The rule
is expected to be finalized by 2007. A “mini rule” to extend two
compliance deadlines established by the 2003 CAFO rule was
also proposed and finalized within a record two month period.
Water Transfers Rulemaking
On June 1, EPA proposed a rule that clarifies that permits are
not required for transfers of water from one body of water to an-
other. Such transfers include routing water through tunnels,
channels, or natural stream courses for public water supplies.
irrigation, power generation, flood control, and environmental res-
toration. The rulemaking was placed on an expedited schedule.
Aquatic Pesticides Rulemaking
EPA issued a proposed and final rule clarifying EPA ’s longstand-
ing policy that an NPDES permit is not required where applica-
tion of a pesticide to, over, including near waters of the United
States is consistent with requirements under the Federal Insecti-
cide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The rule was
signed by the Administrator in November 2006. The rule is
intended to clarify whether an NPDES permit is needed given
several court cases on this issue.
Water Quality Trading
250 ________
20: 232
2005 2 0’
o Facilities with permits
allowing for trading
• Facilities that have
carried out a trade
2nd National Water
Quality Trading
Conference
The Trading Conference, held in
Pittsburgh, PA, in May was very
sucoessful and well attended with
295 attendants representing over
25 states, 40 non-government
organizations, 20 universities, 4
federal agencies and 5 countries.
During the conference, the USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) and the EPA
Office of Water announced the
development of a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) to establish
viable water quality credit trading
markets. The NRCS and EPA OW
collaboration will allow EPA and
USDA to closely coordinate on
promotion of viable trading ar-
rangements between agricultural
entities and regulated point
sources.
L
Trading Tools
OWM developed a one-day water
quality trading course for regula-
tors, the public, and the agricul-
ture community. It was presented
fortheflrsttime atthe May
Conference. A training Webcast
was also held in September 2006
to explain how to apply for the
Targeted Watersheds Grant
program. Jso developed a draft
trading toolkit to help incorporate
trading into NPDES permits.
9
-------
Su bll On r 1s1 rLucthre DnThat Ov
—
—
— —
—
1i1lix p ffo
— o o -
— —
fl-.
o- Tft
ro
& )
—
— o. oon :
TJ 11 I fl i1 Jhl
o
1j fl :jj
Our Nation’s water infrastructure systems are aging and many
will be reaching the end of their useful lives in the next 20-40
years. To keep pace with infrastructure needs of the future,
OWM is focusing efforts on the Four Pillars of Sustainable Infra-
structure — better management, full cost pricing, water efficiency,
and watershed approaches. Using the tools of technology, inno-
vation, and collaboration, we are committed to helping ensure
that our water resources will be available for future generations.
Sustainable Management — Developed and signed a
“Statement of Intent” with six major water utility trade associa-
tions to promote sustainable management systems. EPA and
the associations are refining a utility sector list of “attributes” of
sustainably managed systems and developing a “joint strategy”
to promote sustainable management, in addition to other initia-
tives. We also will develop measures to gauge utility effective-
ness, and develop a strategy to promote widespread adoption of
sustainable management practices across the water sector. Fo-
cus groups are also helping to develop effective messaging.
Asset Management — OWM provides training primarily de-
signed to meet the Advanced Asset Management training needs
of water and wastewater utility CEO5 and senior level personnel.
EPA’s reputation for excellence in this training is recognized by
0th-er Federal Agencies. We have now reached over 2,100 par-
ticipants. Trainings were held during 2006 in Florida, Iowa,
Maine, Massachusetts Michigan Nevada New York, North Caro-
lina, Texas and Washington.
OWM signed a memorandum of understanding with the Federal
Highway Administration to jointly pursue asset management ac-
tivities — giving OWM greater access to FHA tools and resources.
We also worked with our partners to produce new tools including
WERF’s on-line asset management training tool, GETF’s EMS
Wastewater Handbook for the Public Water Sector; and TEAMS
(Total Electronic Asset Management System), an asset manage-
ment tool for small utilities.
Clean Water Needs Survey 2004 — Completed the Report to
Congress (currently under review with 0MB). Also conducted a
CWNS 2008 planning meeting with a group of Regional CWNS
coordinators and State and local representatives and obtained
input on the new web-based data entry system planned for the
2008 survey (March 2006).
Outreach — Published a SI outreach brochure and a toolkit for
practitioners. Developed new outreach materials for the CWNS.
PA
lNaterSense
10
-------
V”et Weather 1 Stormwater Program
Urban wet weather sources remain an important EPA priority
because of the potential impacts on human health and the envi-
ronment. Among the sources for which the CWA provides us
with regulatory tools, urban wet weather sources are the most
significant sources of water pollution today. Urban wet weather
water quality problems are typically difficult to characterize in part
because they are caused by a number of diffuse sources, includ-
ing sewage overflows (both sanitary sewer overflows and sani-
tary sewer overflows), bypasses or inadequate treatment at
sewage treatment plants, and storm water. Adverse effects from
wet weather are typically tied to the condition, type and extent of
the infrastructure.
Peak Wet Weather Flows Guidance
EPA issued a proposed guidance for peak flow management at
publicly owned waste treatment plants served by separate sani-
tary sewer systems that provides a framework that enhances en-
vironmental protection, considers municipal costs and increases
public information.
Combined Sewer
Overflows
EPA is on track to have
schedules in place for
65% of permits for FY
2007 and 75% for FY
2008 for implementing
long term control plans.
e-Stormwater tools
OWM significantly im-
proved the efficiency of
the electronic Notice of
Intent (e-NOl) system
for electronic submittal
of construction and in-
dustrial stormwater
NOls by dischargers
regulated directly by
EPA. In addition, an
e-Reporting component
is being developed for
electronic submittal of
and web-based access
to the Multi-Sector General Permit monitoring data and other re-
ports. This will greatly enhance public access to discharge
characterization information.
25
0
FY06
New and Revised
National Menu of
Stormwater BMPs
The National Menu of Best Man-
agement Practices for Stormwater
Phase II was first released in
October 2000. EPA has renamed,
reorganized, updated, and en-
hanced the features of this web-
site. The new menu is easier to
browse and search and includes
approximately 20 new fact sheets
that highlight innovative practices.
Stormwater Webcasts
A new series of webcast training
sessions for municipal stormwater
managers is now available on the
OWM website. Designed for those
unable to attend out-of-town or
multi-day workshops, this series
provides a mix of basic and ad-
vanced topics in two-hour blocks.
These webcasts will allow partici-
pants to listen to lectures and see
presentations through their
computers.
Many of the webcasts are avail-
able on the OWM website:
• NPDES Permit Writers’ Training
Course
• Developing Your Illicit Dis-
charge Detection & Elimination
(IDDE) Program
• Financing a Municipal Stormwa-
tar Program 1 Post-Construction
Overview and Introduction to
Smart Growth and Low Impact
Deve lopment
• Overview of CAFO Proposed
Rule
FY06 CSO Commitment
with Regional Data
NPD S
100
75
(I)
E
1
a,
0
C l )
0
0
C)
C D
C
a’
C .)
a)
50
.
Commitment D FY06 Achieved
\Ieas ,urc: Percentage and number of CSO per-
mits with schedules in place in permits or other
enforceable mechanisms to implement approved
Long Term Control Plans (LTCPs) (cumulative).
-------
Si at & e or aO Pro jram
1 i iIiI
.
‘y 1 i 1Y J1IL 1I
r
_1 J
—
Oti J t y 0
llo.io
— r ffl y
;U 1
__ 3
— o
The State and Regional Program provides technical and policy
support to help implement the NPDES program. Through coordi-
nation with States and EPA Regions, the program guides consis-
tent and effective translation of water quality goals and standards
into permit limits and conditions. It resolves legal barriers that pre-
vent optimal program implementation and provides proactive and
consistent management of external legal drivers. It also provides
timely information on the integrity of the NPDES program imple-
mentation white working cooperatively to produce efficient proc-
esses and measurable results.
Alaska and Other Program Approvals
EPA is working with the State of Alaska as it seeks authorization
to administer the NPDES program. OWM is committed to helping
establish a strong NPDES program in Alaska. OWM is also work-
ing with New Mexico as it develops its request to administer the
NPDES program and with Ohio as it prepares to have its Agricul-
ture department administer the NPDES program for CAFOs.
OWM reviewed state legal authorities to determine the minimum
legal authorities required for a state to run a NPDES program.
Substantial progress was made to resolve a backlog of out-
standing petitions to withdraw State NPDES programs.
Permit Quality Reviews
In ongoing efforts to ensure the integrity of the national permitting
program, OWM established a Permit Quality Review (PQR) proc-
ess. A pilot review in Region 1 was started in conjunction with the
Office of Water’s Regional Review. OWM has created a strategy
that targets both geographic and topical areas for review. Add i-
tional PQRs are anticipated during FY2007.
Action Items
Regions, States and Territories have committed to approximately
300 action items (or “to do” items) resulting from the Permitting
for Environmental Results review of State and Regional permit-
ting authorities. The items cover a broad range of topics: Whole
Effluent Toxicity, pretreatment programs, stormwater and more.
By the end of FY 2006, 137 of the items (47%) were completed.
Methylmercury Fish Tissue Criterion
Draft Implementation Guidance
This draft Office of Water (OW) document provides technical
guidance to States and authorized Tribes about how to use the
January 2001 fish tissue-based recommended water quality crite-
rion for methylmercury in surface water protection programs (e.g.,
TMDLs, NPDES permitting). OWM worked with other parts of OW
to ensure that the draft guidance addresses questions related to
water quality standards adoption (e.g., site-specific criteria,
variances, monitoring, TMDLs, and NPDES permitting).
12
-------
State & Tribal Capacity Building
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to provide
federal assistance to states (including territories, the District of
Columbia, and Indian Tribes) and interstate agencies to estab-
lish and implement ongoing water pollution control programs.
Prevention and control measures supported by State Water
Quality Management programs include permitting, pollution con-
trol activities, surveillance, monitoring, and enforcement; advice
and assistance to local agencies; and the provision of training
and public information.
Tribal Water Quality Grant Guidance
A new OWM publication, Guidance on Awards of Grants to In-
dian Tribes under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act clearly
defines expectations and requirements for Tribal grant recipients
and provides a framework for evaluating program results. The
guidelines will help redefine how Tribes and the EPA work to-
gether to protect, restore, and maintain the physical and biologi-
cal integrity of our nation’s waters.
During the past 10 years, EPA has increased funding available
for Section 106 grants to Indian Tribes from $3 million to $25
million per year. Although many Tribes have implemented suc-
cessful water quality programs using Section 106 grants, these
guidelines will help to strengthen program management nation-
ally and improve the quality and access to data on the results of
Tribal water quality grant investments. Data collected as a re-
sult of these -
reporting re- Sec. 106 Program Funding
quirements
will help EPA
measure en- 200
vironmental
results and 150
comply with
the Govern-
ment Per- 50
formance and 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
Results Act Year
(GPRA) and
other federal —-— Program Funds — Monitoring Set-aside
mandates.
Permit Fee Incentive Program
OWM developed a draft Permit Fee Incentive Program rulemak-
ing. This rulemaking is intended to provide an incentive to
States that utilize an adequate fee program for NPDES permit-
ting requirements. The rule will be proposed in early 2007.
Support for State
Monitoring Strategies
and National Survey
EPA provided Section 106 grant-
ees with $18.3 million in grants to
support improvements in water
quality monitoring, implementation
of state monitoring strategies and
participation in national water
quality surveys. This was a $8.4
million increase over FY 2005.
The additional funds were distrib-
uted to each state or tribe based
on the number of designated
monitoring sites located within the
grantee’s boundanes.
EPA also developed and finalized
guidelines that describe the allot-
ment formulas used to disperse
those programmatic funds tar-
geted to support enhanced moni-
taring efforts. The guidelines
describe the specific activities that
must be undertaken under this
monitoring initiative in order for
States, Interstate Agencies, and
Tribes to receive the actual initia-
tive funding, resulting in State and
Tribal capacity enhancements
geared toward water quality moni-
toring and reporting.
‘, :‘
13
-------
ll d r ll o im
i ff i
11t xf
iY gj
© ‘ A O -o I t Ji
OWM’s Industrial program works to protect and improve water
quality through technology-based and water quality-based
permitting and to achieve environmental results through program
integrity and efficient permitting operations, Stormwater, Pretreat-
ment, and Industrial Permitting are within its scope. Wastewater
discharges from industrial sources may contain pollutants at lev-
els that affect the quality of receiving waters. The NPDES permit
program establishes specific requirements that control the pollut-
ant discharges from industrial sources. Accomplishments during
2006 include:
Pretreatment Streamlining
OWM initiated a new series of “fact sheets” and “frequently
asked questions” to help industry understand provisions of the
new Pretreatment Streamlining Rule and implementation require-
ments. The first fact sheet describes 13 Pretreatment Streamlin-
ing Rule provisions. The specific changes may require revisions
to the appropriate state or POTW legal authorities or program
documents. A general description of each change is included,
along with a summary of what state or POTW follow-up actions
are needed.
Oil and Gas Rule
Consistent with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, OWM developed
a rule that exempts construction activities at oil and gas sites
from the requirement to obtain an NPDES permit for stormwater
discharges except in very limited instances. This rule became
effective June 12, 2006. However, it explicitly encourages opera-
tors of oil and gas sites to implement best management practices
to minimize erosion and control sediment during and after con-
struction.
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
OWM participated actively in the OPEl-led workgroup to develop
a regulatory “roadmap” for LNG facilities. The “roadmap” will
identify all of the statutory authorities and regulatory require-
ments pertaining to building and operating onshore and offshore
LNG terminals. OWM’s role is to provide information and write-
ups relating to CWA requirements for incorporation in the overall
guidance. OWM has been instrumental in developing and sup-
porting permit limits for EPA regionally issued LNG permits.
Multi. Sector General Permit (MSGP)
OWM helped develop EPA’s new NPDES general permit for
stormwater discharges from industrial activity, also referred to as
the Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP). The permit, still under
review, will replace the existing permit covering industrial sites in
EPA Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10.
14
-------
Commuft
Small, rural communities (communities with fewer than 10,000
people), Indian reservations, and colonias along the U.S.-Mexico
border have historically experienced difficulty in achieving Clean
Water Act goals, due in part to lack of resources and technical
expertise. The Sustainable Communities program aims to provide
small and underserved communities with the financial and techni-
cal assistance and education necessary to achieve sustainable,
appropriate and cost-effective wastewater infrastructure.
Clean Water Indian Set-Aside Grant Program
Awarded $13.3 million in grants to Indian tribes for planning,
design and construction of wastewater treatment facilities on tribal
lands. This represents 45 wastewater projects serving 30 tribes,
or approximately 10,978 households; about 592 had previously
lacked access to a sewage disposal system.
Alaska Native Village (ANV) and Rural Communities
Sanitation Grant Program - EPA awarded $34.5 million in
grants to the State of Alaska for planning, designing and con-
structing drinking and waste water systems to serve ANVs and
Alaskan rural communities. This included 18 projects providing
first-time access to basic water and sanitation for 3,050 homes.
U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program
The program provided $49.3 million to design, plan and construct
basic water supply and wastewater collection and treatment
systems in communities along the U.S.-Mexico border. Approxi-
mately 30,200 homes gained wastewater service connections and
22,500 homes gained drinking water connections in FY06.
Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP)
EPA awarded a $1.7 million grant to RCAP in FY06 to provide
education, training and on-site technical assistance to small rural
communities. With those funds, RCAP provided technical assis-
tance for 210 wastewater projects, serving a total population of
342,480 rural residents including 94,038 low-income individuals.
Operator On-site Technical Assistance Program
Awarded $1.2 million in grants to 47 states and/or training centers
to provide technical assistance to small community waste-water
treatment facilities to help them comply with NPDS permit require-
ments. Last year, the program prevented more than 5 million
pounds of pollutants from entering into our nation’s waters.
National Small Flows Clearinghouse (NSFC)
With a $1.9 million EPA grant NSFC responded to 2,768 technical
assistance calls and distributed 171,611 products to requesters.
Funding also helped sponsor a national meeting of state onsite
program regulators, initiated a public awareness campaign, and
updated its online databases.
— —
— . ø_
—
0 31 T
i Ji F j !X t J-o U X
— o
—
1iii j I
:1 U
o U
___ — 1l_
,p%1tOd Wast.w ,,
fciean Water
I storisat
‘¼ H Yme
15
-------
we welcome you your comments!
Thank you for your interest in the first OWM annual report. We welcome all
comments and suggestions about how we can make this report a more useful
and informative document for our readers. Please send your comments to:
Greg Barranco, Communications Director, Office of Wastewater Manage-
ment. US EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Mail Code 4201M, Washing-
ton, DC 20460; or by email at barranco.qreg( epa.gov .
L
------- |