National Water Program Guidance
Office of Water
Fiscal Year 2009
-------
-------
National Water Program: Fiscal Y
table of contents
Executive Summary
I. Introduction
II. Strategies to Protect Public Health
Water Safe to Drink
Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
Water Safe for Swimming
Strategies to Protect Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands
Restore and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Protect Coastal and Ocean Waters
Protect Wetlands
J
IV. Strategies to Protect Large Aquatic Ecosystems
Protect Mexico Border Water Quality
Protect Pacific Islands Waters
Protect the Great Lakes
Protect and Restore the Chesapeake Bay
Protect the Gulf of Mexico
Protect Long Island Sound
Protect South Florida Ecosystem
Protect the Puget Sound
Protect the Columbia River Basin
a
V. Water Program and Grant Management System
VI. Water Program and Environmental Justice
Appendices
A) FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measures Appendix
B) FY 2009 Water State Grant Measures Appendix
C) Explanation of Key Changes from FY 2008 to FY 2009
D) Detailed FY 2009 Measures Appendix: Measures with National and Regional Data and Targets
Guidance
1
4
4
9
10
13
13
20
22
25
25
26
27
28
30
32
34
36
37
39
44
47
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
-------
I.
This National Water Program Guidance for fiscal year (FY)
2009 describes how the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), states, and tribal governments will work together to
protect and improve the quality of the Nation's waters and
ensure safe drinking water. Within EPA, the Office of Water
oversees the delivery of the national water programs, while
the regional offices work with states, tribes, and others to
implement these programs and other supporting efforts.
The Guidance describes the key actions needed to
accomplish the public health and environmental goals
established in the EPA 2006-2011 Strategic Plan. These
goals are:
Protect public health by improving the quality of
drinking water, making fish and shellfish safer to
eat, and assuring that recreational waters are safe
for swimming;
Protect and restore the quality of the Nation's fresh
waters, coastal waters, and wetlands; and
Improve the health of large aquatic ecosystems
across the country.
III.
The Office of Water recognizes that EPA regional offices,
states, and tribes need flexibility in determining the best
allocation of resources for achieving clean water goals
and safe drinking water at the regional, state, and tribal
level. From a national perspective, however, EPA, states,
and tribes need to give special attention in FY 2009 to the
priority areas identified below:
Support Sustainable Water Infrastructure;
Improve Water Security and Preparedness;
Contribute to the President's Wetlands Goals;
Improve Water Monitoring;
Restore Water Quality on a Watershed Basis; and
Improve Achievement of Drinking Water
Standards.
In addition, regional priorities support the National Water
Program priorities and the Administrator's priorities and
Action Plan. More information on these priorities is provided
in the Introduction to this Guidance.
The National Water Program Guidance describes, in general
terms, the work that needs to be done in FY 2009 to reach
the public health and water quality goals that are identified in
the EPA2006-2011 Strategic Plan. These public health and
environmental goals are organized into 15 "subobjectives,"
and each of the subobjectives is supported by a specific
implementation strategy that includes the following key
elements:
Environmental/Public Health Results
Expected: Each subobjective strategy begins with
a brief review of national goals for improvements
in environmental conditions or public health,
including national "targets" for progress in FY
2009.
Key Strategies: For each subobjective, the
key strategies for accomplishing environmental
goals are described. The role of core programs
(e.g. State Revolving Funds, water quality
standards, discharge permits, development of safe
drinking water standards, and source water
protection) is discussed and a limited number
of key program activity measures are identified. A
comprehensive summary, listing all strategic target
and program activity measures under each
subobjective, is in Appendix A.
FY 2009 Targets for Key Program Activities: For
some of the program activities, EPA, states, and
tribes will simply report progress accomplished in
FY 2009 while for other activities, each EPA region
has defined specific "targets" (see Appendices
A/D). These targets are a point of reference for the
development of more binding commitments to
measurable progress in state and tribal grant
workplans.
Grant Assistance: Each of the subobjective
strategies includes a brief discussion of EPA grant
assistance that supports the program activities
identified in the strategy. The National Water
Program's approach to managing grants for FY
2009 is discussed in Part V of this Guidance.
Environmental Justice: For FY2009, the Office
of Water is aligning the development of this
Guidance with the development of EJ Action Plan.
The National Water Program places emphasis on
achieving results in areas with potential
environmental justice concerns through two
national EJ priorities that are covered by two
subobjectives and other EJ water related
elements.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
The National Water Program uses three types of measures
to assess progress toward the goals in the EPA 2006-2011
Strategic Plan:
Measures of changes in environmental or public
health (i.e., "outcome measures");
Measures of activities to implement core national
water programs; and
Measures of activities to restore and protect large
aquatic ecosystems and implement other water
program priorities in each EPA region.
In the process of developing the EPA 2006-2011 Strategic
Plan, EPA worked with interested parties to improve and
streamline the measures of changes in public health and
the environment. As part of this process, new goals and
supporting measures were established for improving
five additional large aquatic ecosystems that were not
addressed in the previous Strategic Plan (i.e., Long Island
Sound, South Florida, the Columbia River, Puget Sound,
and the Pacific Islands). In the fall of 2006, EPA worked
with states and tribes to streamline the number of National
Water Program measures. EPA continued this work with
states and tribes in the fall of 2007 to align and streamline
more performance measures. The National Water Program
will continue to engage states and tribes in 2008 in the
Agency's performance measurement improvement efforts.
VI. r <"
The National Water Program will evaluate progress toward
the environmental and public health goals described in the
EPA Strategic Plan using four key tools:
National Water Program Performance
Reports: The Office of Water will use data
provided by EPA regional offices, states, and tribes
to prepare performance reports for the National
Water Program at the mid-point and end of each
fiscal year.
Senior Management Measures and Deputy
Administrator Progress Reports: The Office
of Water reports to the Deputy Administrator
the results on a subset of the National Water
Program Guidance measures every six weeks
and on a quarterly basis. In addition,
headquarters and regional senior managers are
held accountable for a select group of the
Guidance measures in their annual performance
assessments.
EPA Headquarters (HQ)/Regional Dialogues:
Each year, the Office of Water will visit up to
four EPA regional offices and great waterbody
offices to conduct dialogues on program
management, grant management, and
performance.
Program-Specific Evaluations: In addition
to looking at the performance of the National
Water Program at the national level and
performance in each EPA region, individual
water programs will be evaluated periodically
under the Program Assessment Rating Tool
(PART) program managed by the Office of
Management and Budget. Additional evaluations
will be conducted internally by program managers
at EPA headquarters and regional offices; and
externally by the EPA Inspector General,
Government Accountability Office, and other
independent organizations.
For additional information concerning this Guidance and
supporting measures, please contact:
Michael Shapiro
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water
Tim Fontaine
Senior Budget Officer, Office of Water
Vinh Nguyen
Program Planning Leader, Office of Water
INTERNET ACCESS:
This FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance and
supporting documents are available at
(htt p ://www. ,g o v/wate rpl a n).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Clean and Safe Water Goals for 2011
The EPA 2006-2011 Strategic Plan, published in October
of 2006, defines specific environmental and public health
improvements to be accomplished by 2011. With the help
of states, tribes, and other partners, EPA expects to make
significant progress toward protecting human health and
improving water quality by 2011, including:
Protect Public Health
Water Safe to Drink: maintain current high
percentage of the population served by systems
meeting health-based Drinking Water standards;
Fish Safe to Eat: reduce the percentage of
women
of child-bearing age having mercury levels in their
blood above levels of concern; and
Water Safe for Swimming: maintain the currently
high percentage of days that beaches are open
and safe for swimming during the beach season.
Restore and Protect Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters,
and Wetlands
Healthy Waters: address an increasing number
of the approximately 40,000 impaired waters
identified by the states in 2002, with the goal of
having at least 2,250 of these waters attain water
quality standards fully by 2012;
Healthy Coastal Waters: show improvement in
the overall condition of the Nation's coastal waters
while at least maintaining conditions in the four
major coastal regions; and
More Wetlands: build on the success of the
President's Wetlands Initiative by continuing to
increase the overall quantity and quality of the
Nation's wetlands.
Improve the Health of Large Aquatic Ecosystems
Implement collaborative programs with other federal
agencies and with states, tribes, local governments, and
others to improve the health of large aquatic ecosystems
including:
Mexico Border waters
Pacific Island waters
the Great Lakes
the Chesapeake Bay
the Gulf of Mexico
the Long Island Sound
South Florida waters
the Puget Sound
the Columbia River
r ,< •<
y' • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Purpose and Structure of this FY2009 Guidance
This National Program Guidance defines the process for
creating an "operational plan" for EPA, state, and tribal water
programs for fiscal year 2009 (FY 2009). This National
Program Guidance is divided into three major sections:
1. Subobjective Implementation Strategies: The
EPA Strategic Plan addresses water programs in Goal 2
(i.e., "Clean and Safe Water") and Goal 4 (i.e., "Healthy
Communities and Ecosystems"). Within these goals, there
are 15 subobjectives that define specific environmental or
public health results to be accomplished by 2009. This
Guidance describes, for each subobjective, the increment
of environmental progress EPA hopes to make in FY 2009
and the program strategies to be used to accomplish these
goals.
The National WaterProg ram is working with EPA's Innovation
Action Council (IAC) to promote program innovations,
including: 1) the National Environmental Performance
Track Program 2)
Environmental Management Systems (EMS) (http://www.
epa.gov/ems/); and, 3) the Environmental Results Program
(ERP) States
and tribes may be able to use these or other innovative
tools in program planning and implementation.
2. Water Measures: Appendix A, a comprehensive
list of performance measures in the Guidance, includes
three types of measures that support the subobjective
strategies and are used to manage water programs:
"Outcome" Strategic Target Measures:
Measures of environmental or public health
changes (i.e. outcomes) are described in the EPA
Strategic Plan and include long-range targets for
this Guidance. These measures are described in
the opening section of each of the subobjective
plan summaries in this Guidance.
National Program Activity Measures: Core
water program activity measures (i.e., output
measures) address activities to be implemented by
EPA and by states/tribes that administer national
programs. They are the basis for monitoring
progress in implementing programs to accomplish
the environmental goals in the Agency Strategic
Plan. Some of these measures have national
and regional "targets" for FY 2009 that serve as a
point of reference as EPA regions work with states
tribes to define more formal regional
"commitments" in the Spring/Summer of 2008.
-------
Ecosystem Program Activity Measures: These
measures address activities to restore and protect
large aquatic ecosystems and implement other
water program priorities in each EPA region.
Over the past six years, EPA has worked with the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) to evaluate key
water programs using the Program Assessment Rating
Tool (PART). This work included identifying measures of
progress for each program. Most of the measures identified
in the PART process are included in this Guidance.
3. Water Program Management System: Part
V of this Guidance describes a three-step process for
management of water programs in FY2009:
Step 1 is the development of this National Water
Program Guidance.
Step 2 involves consultation among EPA regions,
states, and tribes, to be conducted during the
Spring/Summer 2008, to convert the "targets"
in this Guidance into regional "commitments" that
are supported by grant workplans and other
agreements with states and tribes. This process
allocates available resources to those program
activities that are likely to result in the best
progress toward accomplishing water quality and
public health goals given the circumstances
and needs in the state/region. The tailored,
regional "commitments" and state/tribal
workplans that result from this process define,
in an operational sense, the "strategy" for the
National Water Program for FY 2009.
Step 3 involves work to be done during FY 2009 to
assess progress in program implementation and
improve program performance.
FY2009 Program Priorities
The Office of Water recognizes that EPA regions, states,
and tribes need flexibility in determining the best allocation
of program resources for achieving clean water goals
given their specific needs and condition. From a national
perspective, however, EPA, states, and tribes need to give
special attention in FY 2009 to the priority areas identified
below:
1. Support Sustainable Water Infrastructure: EPA
will work with utilities, states, tribes, and others to ensure that
the Nation's wastewater and drinking water infrastructure
is maintained and sustained over time, including ongoing
attention to the effective operation of the State Revolving
Funds. EPA will also encourage practices that reduce the
costs of water infrastructure and promote the adoption
of proven management approaches, like environmental
management systems and asset management. This effort
V
will include work to enhance the market for water efficient
products, encourage adoption of pricing structures that
recover full cost of service, and promote a watershed
approach as an integral part of infrastructure decision-
making.
2. Improve Water Security and Preparedness: EPA
will work with partners to improve security and preparedness
at drinking water and wastewater facilities to reduce the
risks associated with potentially catastrophic natural and
deliberate incidents. EPA will produce tools and training to
enhance general preparedness and continue to implement
the Water Security Initiative while assessing lessons learned
to support adoption of contaminant warning systems by
additional communities.
3. Contribute to the President's Wetlands Goals:
On Earth Day 2004, the President announced a new
national goal of achieving an overall increase in the Nation's
wetlands, including restoring, improving, and protecting at
least three million acres of wetlands over five years (by
2009). In FY 2008, EPA played a leadership role in working
with other federal agencies and states to marshal program
resources to meet this goal. EPA originally committed to
contributing at least 12,000 acres toward the goal by 2009.
Having exceeded this goal in FY 2007, EPA increased its
commitment towards the goal in FY 2008 and again in FY
2009. A key step in meeting this commitment is building the
capacity of state and tribal wetlands programs.
4. Improve Water Monitoring: Improving monitoring,
reporting, and environmental goal setting to keep the
Nation's waters clean, safe, and secure remains a top
priority. EPA will work with states, tribes, and territories as
they implement their monitoring strategies and enhance
their monitoring programs, including adopting state-scale
statistical surveys, participating in the national statistical
surveys of water conditions, providing water quality
assessment data to the STORET warehouse using WQX,
and submitting state integrated report assessment data
using the Assessment Database or a compatible electronic
format. These activities are critical to measuring progress
toward water quality goals. Also in FY 2009, EPA will
continue to work to improve the quality of drinking water
data and implement the Water Security Initiative.
5. Restore Water Quality on a Watershed Basis:
The National Water Program continues efforts to build a
nationwide capacity to restore the health of aquatic systems
on a waterbody and watershed basis. In FY 2009, EPA,
states, and tribes should give priority to implementing key
national program activities supporting this goal, including:
Implementing Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs), including organizing restoration on a
waterbody or watershed basis where appropriate;
-------
introduction
Targeting Clean Water Act Section 319 nonpoint
pollution control funds to develop and implement
watershed plans to help restore impaired waters;
Encouraging water quality trading; and
Assuring that high priority permits are current.
6. Improve Achievement of Drinking Water
Standards: The percentage of the population served by
community water systems (CWSs) that are in compliance
with health-based standards was 91.5 percent in FY 2007.
Water systems are challenged to meet new regulatory
requirements that represent a higher overall level of public
health protection. In FY 2009, EPA, states, tribes, and
local water systems should enhance efforts to maintain
compliance with existing drinking water standards, promptly
address cases of noncompliance, prepare to comply with
new rules, and improve the quality of data by which drinking
water compliance is measured, including paying special
attention to reporting under the Lead and Copper Rule.
EPA, states, and tribes also need to pay special attention
to regional priorities. In late 2005, the Deputy Administrator
asked EPA regional offices to identify a limited number of
regional and state priorities. These priorities were based
upon geographic areas and performance measures that
were established to support the priorities. The geographic
areas include the Northeast, Midwest, Great South, Great
American West, Tribes, U.S.-Mexico Border, and Islands.
Many of the performance measures developed by these
regional groups support the National Water Program national
priorities. The selected regional priorities that align with or
support the National Water Program national goals include
water safe to drink; water safe for swimming; improve
water quality on a watershed basis; increase wetlands; and
improve the health of the U.S.-Mexico border area, Pacific
Islands Territories, Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay
Ecosystem, and Long Island Sound.
These national and regional priorities support the
Administrator's priority of improving our Nation's drinking
water and wastewater infrastructure and Action Plan for
Clean and Safe Water.
' >.L;*» ^ ^ ^ ^ . aBW.,;s „ - - -fjljipR:." „ .
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
V
For each of the key subobjectives related to water addressed
in the EPA Strategic Plan, EPA has worked with states and
other stakeholders to define strategies for accomplishing the
improvements in the environment or public health identified
for the subobjective. This National Program Guidance
draws from the Strategic Plan but describes plans and
strategies at a more operational level and focuses on FY
2009. In addition, this Guidance refers to "Program Activity
Measures" that define key program activities that support
each subobjective (see Appendix A).
A)
Subobjective
Percent of the population served by community water
systems that receive drinking water that meets all applicable
health-based drinking water standards through approaches
including effective treatment and source water protection.
2011
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B)
Key Program Strategies
For more than 30 years, protecting the Nation's public
health through safe drinking water has been the shared
responsibility of EPA, the states, and over 52,000 CWSsa
nationwide that supply drinking water to more than
286 million Americans (approximately 95% of the U.S.
population). Over this time, safety standards have been
established and are being implemented for 91 microbial,
chemical, and other contaminants. Forty-nine states have
adopted primary authority for enforcing their drinking water
programs. Additionally, CWS operators are better informed
and trained on the variety of ways to both treat contaminants
and prevent them from entering the source of their drinking
water supplies.
EPA, states, tribes, and CWSs will work together so that
the population served by CWSs receives drinking waterthat
meets all health-based standards. This goal reflects the
fundamental public health protection mission of the national
"Although the Safe Drinking Water Act applies to 155,710 public water systems nationwide (as of October 2007), which include schools, hospitals,
factories, campgrounds, motels, gas stations, etc. that have their own water system, this implementation plan focuses only on CWSs. A CWS is a public
water system that provides water to the same population year-round. As of October 2007, there were 52,110 CWSs.
drinking water program. Health protection-based regulatory
standards for drinking water quality are the cornerstone of
the program. The standards do not prescribe a specific
treatment approach; rather, individual systems decide how
best to comply with any given standard based on their
own unique circumstances. Systems meet standards by
employing "multiple barriers of protection" including source
water protection, various stages of treatment, proper
operation and maintenance of the distribution and finished
water storage system, and customer awareness.
The overall objective of the drinking water program is to
protect public health by ensuring that public water systems
deliver safe drinking water to their customers. To achieve
this objective the program must work to maintain the gains
of the previous years' efforts; drinking water systems of all
types and sizes that are currently in compliance will work
to remain in compliance. Efforts will be made to bring non-
complying systems into compliance and to assure all systems
will be prepared to comply with the new regulations.
Making sound decisions to allocate resources among various
program areas requires that each EPA region first work with
states to define goals for the program in public health (i.e.,
"outcome") terms. The table below describes estimates of
progress under the key drinking water measure describing
the percent of the population served by community water
systems that receive water that meets all health based
drinking water standards.
Although EPA regions should use the national FY 2009
target of the population served by community water systems
receiving safe drinking water as a point of reference,
regional commitments to this outcome goal may vary based
on differing conditions in each EPA region.
EPA and states support the efforts of individual water
systems by providing a program framework that includes
core programs implemented by EPA regional offices and
states. Core national program areas that are critical to
ensuring safe drinking water are:
Development or revision of drinking water
standards;
Implementation of drinking water standards and
technical assistance to water systems to enhance
their technical, managerial, and financial capacity;
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund;
Water security;
Source water protection;
Underground injection control (UIC); and
Integration of programs to protect surface water
that is a source of drinking water.
-------
for by
EPA Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
National Total
2005 Baseline
92.5%
55.3%
93.2%
93%
94.1%
87.8%
91 .2%
94.7%
94.6%
94.8%
89%
2007 Actual
92%
77%
95%
93%
93%
92%
93%
97%
95%
92%
92%
2008 Commitment
89%
75%
92%
91%
91%
88%
93%
90%
95%
90%
90%
2009 Target
89%
75%
90%
91%
91%
89%
92%
90%
95%
90%
89%
Collectively, these core areas of the national safe drinking
water program comprise the multiple-barrier approach to
protecting public health. In each of these areas, specific
Program Activity Measures indicate progress being made
and some measures include "targets" for FY 2009. For
measures with targets, a national target and a target for each
EPA region, where applicable, are provided in Appendix A.
In FY2009, EPA will carry out a number of efforts to support
decision-making on existing, proposed, and potential future
regulations.
In FY2009, EPA will release a final Contaminant
Candidate List (CCL3) after reviewing and
evaluating comments and information submitted in
response to publication of the draft third CCL3 in
2008. The CCL identifies drinking water
contaminants which may require regulation.
Between 2008 and 2010, EPA will be collecting,
compiling and analyzing data on the frequency
and level of occurrence of 25 unregulated
contaminants in public water systems through
implementation of the second Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring Rule. This information
will support future determinations whether to
regulate a contaminant in the interest of protecting
public health.
EPA will be evaluating new information on health
effects, occurrence, and other information for
regulated contaminants to determine what if any
revisions are appropriate under the National
Primary Drinking Water Rule Review completed
every six years, with a goal of issuing the
preliminary results of the review for comment in
early 2009.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The Agency will also be developing proposed
revisions to the Total Coliform Rule and
considering data and research needs for water
distribution systems, based on recommendations
from the Total Coliform Rule/Distribution Systems
Federal Advisory Committee.
2, of
Tschnical Assistance
In order to facilitate compliance with drinking water
regulations, EPA will use the following tools in partnership
with states and tribes:
Sanitary Surveys: Sanitary surveys are on-
site reviews of the water sources, facilities, equipment,
operation, and maintenance of public water systems. States
and tribes conduct sanitary surveys for community water
systems once every three years, or for systems determined
by the state or tribe to have outstanding performance based
on prior surveys, subsequent surveys may be conducted
every five years. EPA will also conduct surveys at systems
on tribal lands. Focused monitoring of this activity was
initiated in 2007, for the three-year period starting in 2004
(see Program Activity Measure SDW-1). This measure
applies to surface water systems and ground water systems
under direct influence of surface water and, by late 2009,
will also apply to ground water systems. Therefore, EPA will
be working with states to ensure that they are prepared to
address the large number of ground water systems that will
have to receive sanitary surveys.
Technical Assistance and Training: Reference
materials to support implementation of recent regulations
will be developed. These materials will include technical
guidance, rollout strategies, implementation guidance, and
quick reference guides. Assistance will focus particularly on
the Ground Water Rule and revised Lead and Copper Rule.
-------
V
EPA will promote operation and maintenance best practices
to small systems in support of long term compliance success
with existing regulations. EPA will also support states with
technical reviews of public water system submissions
required for the Stage 2 Disinfection Byproduct Rule in
2009. EPA will work directly with systems by conducting
training and reviewing monitoring submissions in states that
are not conducting early implementation of the LT2/Stage 2
rules (a subset of a universe of over 59,000 systems that
will need to comply with the rules during FY 2009).
Small System Assistance: EPA will also continue
to provide technical assistance and leverage partners to help
systems serving less than 3,300 people meet existing and
new drinking water standards. The Agency will also support
states in their efforts to provide technical, managerial,
and financial assistance to small systems to improve
those systems' capacity to consistently meet regulatory
requirements. We will accomplish this by promoting
cost-effective treatment technologies, proper disposal of
treatment residuals, and compliance with contaminant
requirements, including monitoring under the arsenic and
radionuclide rules and rules controlling microbial pathogens
and disinfection byproducts.
Small and/or rural public water systems face many
challenges in providing safe drinking water and meeting
the requirements of SDWA. These challenges include: (1)
turnover of operations personnel; (2) part-time personnel
who may lack necessary technical, financial, and managerial
skills; (3) volunteer boards and councils; and (4) complex
drinking water regulations. Rural water systems benefit
greatly from face-to-face training and on-site technical
assistance. Organizations such as the National Rural Water
Association and the Rural Community Assistance Program
provide technical assistance and training to supplement
state efforts, and the Office of Water encourages state
drinking water programs to work with these organizations to
support public health protection in rural water systems.
Area-wide Optimization Program: Under EPA's
voluntary Area-Wide Optimization Program (AWOP),
drinking water systems and states will continue to use a
variety of optimization tools, including comprehensive
performance evaluations (CPEs) to assess the performance
of filtration technology. AWOP is a highly successful technical
assistance and training program that enhances the ability
of small systems to meet existing and future microbial,
disinfectant, and disinfection byproducts standards. By
the end of 2009, EPA expects that 30 states and 6 EPA
regional offices will be working to establish, strengthen, and
enhance AWOPs. In addition, EPA will expand the scope
of the program technical content to incorporate distribution
system integrity elements into the performance-based
training approach to facilitate the transfer of key skills
specific to groundwater systems and distribution system
components.
Data Access, Quality and Reliability: The Safe
Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) serves as the
primary source of national information on compliance with
all health-based regulatory requirements of SDWA. EPA
will continue to work with states, with one focus being to
increase the use of SDWIS/State because of its ease of
reporting and compatibility with the national SDWIS.
To improve SDWIS data quality, EPA will continue to work
with states to implement the recommendations of the
Agency's Data Reliability Improvement Plan that are based
on results of data verification audits conducted by the
Agency. In FY 2009, EPA will report annually the percent
of data concerning health-based violations that is complete
and accurate (see Program Activity Measure SDW-2). In
addition, for community water systems serving greater than
3,300 people, EPA will also monitor lead monitoring results
for the Lead and Copper Rule to ensure that the data is
complete (see Program Activity Measure SDW-3).
Coordination with Enforcement: The EPA
regional offices and the Office of Water will also work with
the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance to
identify instances of actual or expected non-compliance that
pose risks to public health and to take appropriate actions
as necessary.
o.
The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF),
established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, enables
states to offer low interest loans to help public water
systems across the nation make improvements and
upgrades to their water infrastructure, or other activities
that build system capacity. As of the end of FY 2007, more
than 5,555 infrastructure improvement projects had been
funded from the more than $14.4 billion available from a
combination of federal grants, state contributions, bond
proceeds, repayments, and earnings.
EPA will work with states to increase the DWSRF fund
utilization rateb for projects from a 2002 level of 73% to 87%
in 2009 (see Program Activity Measure SDW-4). EPA will
also work with states to monitor the number of projects that
have initiated operations (see Program Activity Measure
SDW-5).
In 2009, the Agency will release the next Drinking Water
Infrastructure Needs Assessment report, based on data
collected from utilities in 2007. The survey documents
bFund Utilization Rate is the cumulative dollar amount of loan agreements divided by cumulative funds available.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
20-year capital investment needs of public water systems
that are eligible to receive DWSRF monies - approximately
52,000 community water systems and 21,400 not-for-
profit non-community water systems. The survey reports
infrastructure needs that are required to protect public
health, such as projects to ensure compliance with the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA). As directed by the SDWA, EPA
will use the results of the survey to determine allocations of
DWSRF funds to the states and tribes for the period FYs
2010-2013.
In FY 2009, EPA will further contribute to the sustainable
infrastructure initiative through partnership-building
activities, including the Agency's capacity development
and operator certification work with states, and efforts with
leaders in the drinking water utility industry to promote asset
management and the use of watershed-based approaches
to manage water resources. The drinking water program
will engage states and other stakeholders to facilitate the
voluntary adoption by public water systems of attributes
associated with effectively managed utilities. Finally, the
program will continue to expand efforts to encourage water
efficient practices at public water systems aimed at reducing
leakage and better understanding linkages between water
production/distribution and energy use.
4,
EPA will provide tools, training, and technical assistance to
help protect the Nation's critical water infrastructure from
terrorist and other catastrophic events. Reducing risk in the
water sector requires a multi-step approach of determining
risk through vulnerability assessments, reducing risk
through security enhancements, and preparing to effectively
respond to and recover from incidents. Homeland Security
Presidential Directives (HSPDs) 7 and 9 direct EPA to
help the water sector implement protective measures
including comprehensive water surveillance and monitoring
programs.
As outlined in HSPD 7, the water sector must be provided
tools and information to prevent, detect, respond to, and
recover from a terrorist or other intentional attack. EPA
will, in FY 2009, continue prevention, detection, response,
and recovery activities for the water sector in collaboration
with the Department of Homeland Security and states'
homeland security and water officials. Also in FY2009, the
program will continue to support deployment and operation
of contamination warning systems at five pilot cities. These
pilots will provide opportunities to evaluate operational
experience at different water systems. EPA also will
evaluate operation, performance, and sustainability for
the first pilot contamination warning system; and conduct
outreach efforts to migrate lessons learned from the pilots
to the water sector.
Preparedness is critical to effective recovery after an
incident. In FY 2009, as part of the Water Laboratory
Alliance, EPA regional offices will continue to build regional
alliances to provide laboratories and utilities with access to
supplemental analytical capability and capacity, improved
preparedness for analytical support to an emergency
situation, and coordinated and standardized data reporting
systems and analytical methods.
EPA will continue to facilitate training for emergency
preparedness and development of mutual aid Water and
Wastewater Agency Response Networks (WARNS) in
every state. The program will also continue efforts to build
effective relationships to support activities carried under
Emergency Support Functions 10 (on hazardous materials,
managed by EPA), and 3 (on infrastructure, managed by
FEMA).
5. of
EPA will continue to promote the concept of a multiple barrier
approach to drinking water program management and will
work with states to track the developmentand implementation
of source water protection strategies. EPA has set a goal
of increasing the number of CWSs with minimized risk to
public health through development and implementation of
protection strategies for source water areas (counted by
states) from a baseline of 20% of all areas in FY 2005 to
35% in FY 2009 (see measure SP-4a). EPA has also set a
goal of maintaining the percent of the population served by
these community water systems at the FY 2007 baseline of
45% in FY2009 (see measure SP-4b).
EPA will continue to work with other federal agencies to
increase awareness of source water protection for better
management of significant sources of contamination. EPA
provides training, technical assistance, and technology
transfer capabilities to states and localities. This will include
working with programs within the federal government, such
as the Clean Water Act and underground storage tank
programs, to increase source water protection efforts in
source water areas for CWSs.
EPA will also continue to work with national, state, and local
stakeholder organizations and the multi-partner Source
Water Collaborative to encourage broad-based efforts
directed at encouraging actions at the state and local level
to address sources of contamination identified in source
water assessments.
8,
EPA works with states to monitor the injection of fluids
underground, both hazardous and non-hazardous, to
prevent contamination of underground sources of drinking
water. In FY2009, EPA and states will continue to implement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
T^
V
the program for Classes I, II, III, IV, and V wells, including
tracking wells that lost mechanical integrity and returned to
compliance within 180 days (see Program Activity Measure
SDW-7).
EPA and states will also work to address Class V wells
identified in violation and to close or permit Class V motor
vehicle waste disposal wells (see Program Activity Measure
SOW- 6). EPA will also monitor the number and percent
of high priority Class V wells identified in source water
protection areas that are closed or permitted (see Program
Activity Measure SDW-8).
EPAwill continue to work with states to populate the database
for the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, which
will help the Agency to better track wells and the success
of the program. Specifically, we will deploy and implement
the UIC database through orientation and training of users
and leveraging opportunities to reach users through their
national association.
EPA through the UIC program is responsible for a UIC
regulatory framework forcarbon sequestration which ensures
that underground sources of drinking water are not placed
at risk. EPA released national technical guidance to assist
EPA regional and state UIC programs in permitting pilot-
scale CO2 geologic sequestration (GS) projects, operated
by the Department of Energy's Regional Partnerships,
as Class V Experimental Technology wells. In FY 2008,
EPA will propose regulations to manage commercial scale
GS projects. In FY 2009, EPA will continue to carry out
responsibilities in permitting current and future geologic
sequestration (GS) of carbon dioxide projects. Activities
planned include:
Continue development of final national rules for
the GS of carbon dioxide recovered from
emissions of power plants and other facilities.
Analyze data collected through Department of
Energy pilot projects and industry efforts to
demonstrate and commercialize geologic
sequestration of carbon dioxide technology;
Engage states and stakeholders through
meetings, workshops and other avenues, as
appropriate; and
Provide technical assistance to states in permitting
initial GS projects; and where EPA has primacy,
permit GS projects.
7, Is a
of
In addition to implementing programs authorized by the
Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA is encouraging states and
communities to expand source water protection to leverage
the resources of other programs to protect drinking water
supplies, such as water quality standards and watershed
restoration under the Clean Water Act and land stewardship
authorities of the Forest Service.
State water quality standards set the benchmarks for water
surface quality including that of drinking water sources. In
FY 2007, EPA provided states the results of an evaluation
which showed the extent to which surface water sources of
drinking water are designated for public water supply use.
EPA anticipates that state drinking water administrators and
state water quality managers will check the validity of these
results and discuss their implications for future program
priorities. Where these results indicate that surface water
sources of drinking water are not designated as such, EPA
encourages states to assign those designations in the
interest of protecting public health.
In FY2009, EPAwill continueto work with statesto encourage
the use of this information to better coordinate activities
between the State Water Quality Standards Program and
Source Water Protection Programs. EPA will also cross-
walk CWS locations with water quality data as snapshots, to
the extent the latter is available from ATTAINS to determine
if surface water sources of drinking water are monitored by
states (see Program Activity Measure SDW-9) are listed as
impaired, have TMDLs or attaining water quality standards
(see Program Activity Measure SDW-10).
These crossed-walked data sets will represent a subset of
data collected forwaterquality measures underSubobjective
2.2.1, Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis. The
results for SDW-9 and SDW-10 will present opportunities
for state drinking water administrators and state water
quality managers to identify shared priorities in addressing
water quality problems. However, these results may also
raise questions for some states regarding how they should
prioritize the assessment of their waters and the restoration
of their impaired waters.
C)
Grant Program Resources
EPA has several program grants to the states, authorized
underthe Safe Drinking WaterAct, thatsupportworktowards
the drinking water strategic goals including the Public
Water System Supervision (PWSS), Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF), Underground Injection Control
(DIG), and water security grants. For additional information
on these grants, see the grant program guidance on the
website (http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan).
The PWSS grants support the states' primacy activities
(e.g., enforcement and compliance with drinking water
regulations). PWSS grant guidance issued for FY 2005 will
continue to apply in FY 2008. Of the FY 2008 President's
Budget request of $99.1 million, approximately $6.4 million
will support implementation of the Tribal Drinking Water
Programs.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
i^^p^g^^ ••' -
m
The DWSRF program provides significant resources
for states to use in protecting public health. Through FY
2007, the program as a whole provided over $12.6 billion
in assistance and states reserved over $1.3 billion in set-
asides to support key drinking water programs. In FY 2009,
the Agency requested $842 million for the program. EPA is
emphasizing targeting DWSRF resources to achieve water
system compliance with health-based requirements.
Tribal drinking water systems and Alaska Native Village
water systems face the challenge of improving access to
safe drinking water for the populations they serve. Funding
for development of infrastructure to address public health
goals related to access to safe drinking water comes
from several sources within EPA and from other federal
agencies. EPA reserves 1.5% of the DWSRF funds for
grants for Tribal and Alaska Native Village drinking water
projects, including upgrading of community water systems
and improving access through construction of new systems.
EPA also administers a grant program for drinking water and
wastewater projects in Alaska Native Villages. Additional
funding is available from other federal agencies, including
the Indian Health Service.
The FY2009 budget requests $10.9 million forgrants to states
to carry out primary enforcement (primacy) responsibilities
for implementing regulations associated with Classes I, II,
III, IV and V underground injection control wells. In addition,
emphasis is directed to activities that address shallow wells
(Class V) in source water protection areas.
A) Subobjective
Percent of women of child bearing age having mercury levels
in blood above the level of concern (of 4.6 percent).
2011
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key National Strategies
Elevated blood mercury levels pose a significant health
risk and consumption of mercury- contaminated fish is the
primary source of mercury in blood. Across the country,
•;/•'" ' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
states and tribes have issued fish consumption advisories
fora range of contaminants covering 839,000 stream miles
and over 14 million lake acres. In addition about 18 percent
of the 22 million valuable shellfishing acres managed by
states are not open for use. EPAs national approach to
meeting safe fish and shellfish goals is described on the
following pages.
1,
EPAs approach to making fish safer to eat includes several
key elements:
Encourage development of statewide mercury
reduction strategies;
Reduce air deposition of mercury; and
Improve public information and notification offish
consumption risks.
a) Comprehensive Statewide Mercury Reduction
Programs
EPA recognizes that restoration of waterbodies impaired by
mercury may require coordinated efforts to address widely
dispersed sources of contamination and that restoration
may require a long-term commitment.
In early March 2007, EPA established guidelines allowing
states the option of developing comprehensive mercury
reduction programs in conjunction with their FY2008 lists of
impaired waters developed under Section 303(d) of the Clean
Water Act. Under the new guidelines, EPA allows states
that have a comprehensive mercury reduction program to
place waters impaired by mercury in a subcategory "5m"
of their impaired waters lists and defer development of
mercury TMDLs for these waters. These mercury impaired
waters would not be included in estimates of the "pace" of
TMDL development needed to meet the goal of developing
TMDLs for impaired waters within 8 to 13 years of listing the
waterbody.
The key elements of a state comprehensive mercury
reduction program are:
Identification of air sources of mercury in the state,
including adoption of appropriate state level
programs to address in-state sources;
Identification of other potential multi-media
sources of mercury in products and wastes and
adoption of appropriate state level programs;
Adoption of statewide mercury reduction goals and
targets, including targets for percent reduction and
dates of achievement;
Multi-media mercury monitoring;
Public documentation of the state's mercury
reduction program in conjunction with the state's
Section 303(d) list; and
-------
Coordination across states where possible, such
as through the use of multi-state mercury
reduction programs.
EPAexpectsthatthese elements of a comprehensive mercury
reduction program will be in place in order for 5m listings to
be appropriate (i.e., specific legislation, regulations, or other
programs that implement the required elements have been
formally adopted by the state, as opposed to being in the
planning or implementation stages). States will have the
option of using the "5m" listing approach as part of the 2010
Section 303(d) lists due to EPA in April 2010.
EPA will also use available tools to identify specific waters
with high mercury levels and then address these problems
using core Clean Water Act program authorities, including
TMDL and permitting programs where a state does not
develop a comprehensive statewide reduction strategy for
specific waters in which a local source of mercury can be
addressed using existing tools.
b)
Reduce Air Deposition of Mercury
Most fish advisories are for mercury, and a critical element of
the strategy to reduce mercury in fish is reducing emissions
of mercury from combustion sources in the United States.
On a nationwide basis, by 2010, federal regulatory programs
are expected to reduce electric-generating unit emissions of
mercury from their 2000 level (see EPA Strategic Plan; Goal
1: Clean Air, Subobjective 1.1.2: Reduced Risk from Toxic
Air Pollutants).
c) Improve Public Information and Notification of Fish
Consumption Risks
Another key element of the strategy to make fish safer to
eat is to expand and improve information and notification of
the risks offish consumption. As part of this work, EPA is
also encouraging and supporting states and tribes to adopt
the new fish tissue criterion for mercury that EPA issued in
2001 and apply it based on implementation guidance to be
issued in 2008.
EPA is actively monitoring the development of fish
consumption advisories and working with states to improve
monitoring to support this effort. By 2008, EPA expects that
fish tissues will be assessed to support waterbody-specific
or regional consumption advisories for at least 28% of lake
acres and 40% of river miles (see Program Activity Measure
FS-1). EPA also encourages states and tribes to monitor
fish tissue based on national guidance and most states are
now doing this work.
2,
Shellfish safety is managed through the Interstate Shellfish
Sanitation Conference (ISSC), a partnership of the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA); the state shellfish
control agencies, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and the EPA. The state shellfish
control agencies monitor shellfishing waters and can prohibit
or restrict harvesting if the waters from which shellfish are
taken are considered unsafe.
Success in achieving the shellfish goals relies on
implementation of Clean Water Act programs that are
focused on sources causing shellfish acres to be closed.
Important new technologies include pathogen source
tracking, new indicators of pathogen contamination and
predictive correlations between environmental stressors and
their effects. Once critical areas and sources are identified,
core program authorities, including expanded monitoring,
development of TMDLs, and revision of discharge permit
limits can be applied to improve conditions.
In addition, a wide range of clean water programs that apply
throughout the country will generally reduce pathogen levels
in key waters. For example, work to control Combined
Sewer Overflows, to reduce discharges from Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operations, to reduce storm water runoff,
and to reduce nonpoint pollution will contribute to restoration
of shellfish uses.
Finally, success in achieving the shellfish goal also depends
on improving the availability of state shellfish information.
EPA, along with NOAA and FDA, is encouraging states to
participate in the ISSC and report shellfish information. EPA
is also working to improve data concerning the location of
open and restricted shellfishing areas.
C) Grant Program Resources
Grant resources supporting this goal include the state
program grant under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act,
other water grants identified in the Grant Program Resources
section of Subobjective 4, and grants from the Great
Lakes National Program Office. For additional information
on these grants, see the grant program guidance on the
website (http://www. epa rplan).
A) Subobjective
Percent of days of the beach season that coastal and Great
Lakes beaches monitored by state beach safety programs
are open and safe for swimming:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency r,v*_
-------
strategies to protect public health •'
97% 91%
t: 91% SS%
m
(Note: Additional measures of progress are included in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key National Strategies
The Nation's waters, especially beaches in coastal areas
and the Great Lakes, provide recreational opportunities
for millions of Americans. Swimming in some recreational
waters, however, can pose a risk of illness as a result of
exposure to microbial pathogens. By "recreational waters"
EPA means waters officially recognized for primary contact
recreation use or similar full body contact use by states,
authorized tribes, and territories.
For FY 2009, EPA's national strategy for improving the
safety of recreational waters will include four key elements:
1,
science;
>ed on
a)
Identify unsafe recreational waters and begin
restoration;
Reduce pathogens levels in all recreational
waters; and
Improve beach monitoring and public notification.
Continue to Develop the Scientific Foundation
to Support the Next Generation of Recommended
Water Quality Criteria
The Beach Act requires EPA to develop new or revised
recreational water quality criteria. EPA is actively working
to develop and begin implementing a science plan that will
provide the support needed to underpin the next generation
of recommended water quality criteria.
b) Identify Unsafe Recreational Waters and Begin
Restoration
A key component of the strategy to restore waters unsafe for
swimming is to identify the specific waters that are unsafe
and develop plans to accomplish the needed restoration. A
key part of this work is to maintain strong progress toward
implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
which are developed based on the schedules established by
states in conjunction with EPA. Program Activity Measure
WQ-8 indicates that most EPA regions expect to maintain
schedules providing for completion of TMDLs within 13
years of listing. EPA will continue to work with states to
expand implementation of TMDLs, including developing
TMDLs on a water segment or watershed basis where
appropriate (see Section 11.1).
U,S. Environmental Protection Agency
In a related effort, the Office of Water will work in partnership
with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
(OECA) to better focus compliance and enforcement
resources to unsafe recreational waters. In addition, wet
weatherdischarges, which are a majorsource of pathogens,
are one of OECA's national priorities.
c) Reduce Pathogen Levels in Recreational Waters
Generally
In addition to focusing on waters that are unsafe for
swimming today, EPA, states and tribes will work in FY
2009 to reduce the overall level of pathogens discharged to
recreational waters using three key approaches:
Reduce pollution from Combined Sewer Overflows
(CSOs);
Address other sources discharging pathogens
under the permit program; and
Encourage improved management of septic
systems.
Overflows from combined storm and sanitary sewers in
urban areas can result in high levels of pathogens being
released during storm events. Because urban areas are
often upstream of recreational waters, these overflows
are a significant source of unsafe levels of pathogens.
EPA is working with states and local governments to fully
implement the CSO Policy providing for the development
and implementation of Long Term Control Plans (LTCPs)
for CSOs. EPA expects that close to 78% of the 853 CSO
permits will have schedules in place to implement approved
LTCPs in FY2009 (see Program Activity Measure SS-1).
Other key sources of pathogens to the Nation's waters are
discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
(CAFOs) and municipal storm sewer systems and industrial
facilities. EPA expects to work with states to assure that
these facilities are covered by permits.
Finally, there is growing evidence that ineffective septic
systems are adversely impacting water resources. EPA will
work with state and local governments to develop voluntary
approaches to improving management of these systems.
d)
Improve Beach Monitoring and Public Notification
Another important element of the strategy for improving
the safety of recreational waters is improving monitoring
of public beaches and notifying the public of unsafe
conditions. EPA is working with states to implement the
Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health
(BEACH) Act and expects that 99 percent of "significant"
public beaches will be monitored in accordance with
BEACH Act requirements in FY2009 (see Program Activity
Measure SS-2). Significant public beaches are those
11
-------
National Water Progwm;;'FlSeW"rcarSSdi'Guidance
strategies to protect public health
identified by states as "Tier 1" in their Beach monitoring and
notification programs. Finally, EPA will continue to receive
and display state information on beach notifications through
the eBeaches system (http://www.epa.gov/beaches/).
C) Grant Program Resources
Grant resources supporting this goal include the Clean
Water Act Section 106 grant to states, nonpoint source
program implementation grants (Section 319 grants),
and the BEACH Act grant program grants. For additional
information on these grants, see the grant program guidance
on the website (http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agen.
-------
An overarching goal of the National Water Program is to
protect aquatic systems throughout the country, including
rivers, lakes, coastal waters, and wetlands. Although the
three subobjective strategies described below address
discrete elements of the Nation's water resources, the
National Water Program manages these efforts as part of
a comprehensive effort. In addition, the national strategies
described below are intended to work in concert with the
efforts to restore and protect the large aquatic ecosystems
described in Part IV of this Guidance.
A) Subobjective
Use pollution prevention and restoration approaches to
protect and restore the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams
on a watershed basis.
(NOTE: Additional measures of progress are included in
the Appendices, including measures related to watersheds
and maintaining water quality in streams already meeting
standards.)
B) Key National Strategies
lnFY2009, EPA will work with states and others to implement
programs to protect and restore these water resources with
three key goals in mind:
Core Water Programs: EPA, states, and
tribes need to maintain and improve the integration
and implementation of the core national clean
water programs throughout the country.
Broaden Use of the Watershed Approach: EPA
will continue to support implementation of
"watershed approaches" to restoring and
protecting waters. This work will be coordinated
with the efforts to restore and protect large aquatic
ecosystems discussed in Part IV of this Guidance.
Water Restoration Goals and Strategies: EPA
will work with states and tribes to strengthen
capacities to identify and address impaired
waters and to use adaptive management
:<,. ;.'« ,- o • -:-v. -v. ;; w. A Strategic Response
The National Water Program has established a Climate Change Workgroup to improve understanding of climate
change impacts on water resources (e.g. warming water temperatures, changes in rainfall, and sea level rise). The
Agency has requested public comments on a draft Strategy developed by the Workgroup by the end of May (see
www.epa.gov/water/climatechange/).
The draft Strategy identifies five major goals constituting the National Water Program response to climate change:
Water Program Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases: use water programs to contribute to greenhouse
gas mitigation;
Water Program Adaptation to Climate Change: adapt implementation of core water programs to
maintain and improve program effectiveness in the context of a changing climate;
Climate Change Research Related to Water: strengthen the link between EPA water programs and
climate change research;
Water Program Education on Climate Change: educate water program professionals and
stakeholders on climate change impacts on water resources; and
Water Program Management of Climate Change: establish the management capability to engage
climate change challenges on a sustained basis.
The draft Strategy also identifies 46 supporting
the challenges posed by climate change.
'key actions" that the National Water Program can take in response to
-------
,
V
approaches to implement cost-effective restoration
solutions, giving priority to watershed approaches
where appropriate.
1. to
All
In FY2009, EPA and the states need to continue to effectively
implement and better integrate programs established under
the Clean Water Act to protect, improve, and restore water
quality on a watershed basis. Regions have the flexibility
to emphasize various parts of core national programs and
modify targets to meet EPA region and state needs and
conditions. Key tasks for FY 2009 include:
Strengthen the water quality standards program;
Improve water quality monitoring and assessment;
Implement TMDLs and other watershed plans;
Implement practices to reduce pollution from all
nonpoint sources;
Strengthen the NPDES permit program; and
Support sustainable wastewater infrastructure.
Priorities for FY 2009 in each of these program areas are
described below.
a)
Strengthen Water Quality Standards:
Water Quality Standards are the regulatory and scientific
foundation of water quality protection programs under the
Clean Water Act. Under the Act, states and authorized
tribes establish water quality standards that define the goals
and limits for waters within their jurisdictions. They are used
to determine which waters must be cleaned up, how much
may be discharged, and what is needed for protection.
To help achieve strategic targets, EPA will continue to
review and approve or disapprove state and tribal water
quality standards and promulgate replacement standards
where needed; develop water quality criteria, information,
methods, models, and policies to ensure that each
waterbody in the United States has a clear, comprehensive
suite of standards that define the highest attainable uses;
and as needed, provide technical and scientific support to
states, territories, and authorized tribes in the development
of their standards. EPA will also continue implementation of
the Strategy for Water Quality Standards and Criteria (EPA,
August 2003), which identifies highest priority actions for
strengthening the policy and scientific foundation of state
and tribal water quality programs.
A high priority is to support state and territory development
of numeric nutrient criteria - water quality criteria to help
target reductions in excess nitrogen and phosphorus that
can cause eutrophication and other problems in lakes,
estuaries, rivers, and streams. EPA will work with states and
territories as they develop and implement mutually-agreed
upon plans for developing nutrient water quality standards
and will provide technical tools and guidance to assist them
(see Program Activity Measure WQ-1).
In a related effort, EPA will continue to encourage and
support tribes to obtain approval to administer water quality
standards programs and to develop water quality standards
(see Program Activity Measure WQ-2).
EPA will also work with states, territories, and authorized
tribes to ensure the effective operation of the standards
program, including working with them to keep their water
quality standards up to date with the latest scientific
information (see Program Activity Measures WQ-3a and 4b)
and to facilitate adoption of standards that EPA can approve
(see Program Activity Measure WQ-4a and 4b).
States, territories, and authorized tribes should make their
water quality standards accessible to the public on the
Internet in a systematic format. Users should be able to
identify the current EPA-approved standards that apply to
each waterbody, for example by accessing tables and maps
of designated uses and related criteria. EPA has developed
the Water Quality Standards Database for this purpose.
EPA will provide a copy of the Database fora state, territory,
or tribe to populate, operate, and maintain locally if it does
not have its own database. You may request a copy of the
WQSDB and guidance for installing and using it at
www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/wqshome/.
b) Improve Water Quality Monitoring and
Assessment:
Over the next five years, EPA will work with states and
tribes in providing information to make good water quality
protection and restoration decisions and tracking changes
in the Nation's water quality over time.
A top priority for the past several years has been state
and EPA cooperation on statistically-valid assessments of
water condition nationwide. In FY 2009, EPA will issue a
report on baseline conditions in lakes. States, tribes, EPA,
and other partners will also be analyzing samples for a
statistically valid survey of baseline conditions in rivers and
a second survey of wadeable streams to assess changes in
stream conditions against the baseline report published in
2006. Planning for a fifth statistically valid survey of coastal
waters, as well as a first survey of baseline conditions of
wetlands will occur. FY 2009 CWA Section 106 Monitoring
Initiative funds will be used for sampling and analysis in the
coastal condition survey, as well as for implementation of
state monitoring enhancements.
In FY2009, states will continue implementing theirmonitoring
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
strategies to keep to established schedules (see Program
Activity Measure WQ-5). EPA will stress the importance of
using statistical surveys to generate statewide assessments,
monitor waters where restoration actions have been
implemented, and transmit water quality data to the national
STORE! warehouse using the new WQX protocol. EPA
will also assist tribes in developing monitoring strategies
appropriate to their water quality programs and encourage
tribes to provide data in a format accessible for storage in
EPA data systems (see Program Activity Measure WQ-6).
In a related effort, EPA will work with states and territories
to develop integrated assessments of water conditions,
including reports under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water
Act and lists of impaired waters under Section 303(d) of the
Act by April 1, 2008. In support of this integrated reporting,
and to improve state capability to report on environmental
progress in a geo-referenced format, EPA is asking all
states/territories to report their data using the Assessment
Database or a compatible system in FY2009 (see Program
Activity Measure WQ-7) and to provide these reports in a
timely manner.
c) Implement TMDLs and Other Watershed
Related Plans:
Development and implementation of TMDLs for an impaired
waterbody is a critical tool for meeting water restoration
goals. TMDLs focus on clearly defined environmental goals
and establish a pollutant budget, which is then implemented
via permit requirements and through local, state, and federal
watershed plans/programs. Strong networks, including
the National Estuary Programs (see "Protect Coastal and
Ocean Waters" Subobjective), as well as the Association of
State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators
(ASIWPCA), and the partnership galvanized by a recent EPA-
Forest Service Memorandum of Agreement ://www. e pa,
foster efficient strategies to
address water quality impairments. These networks are
uniquely positioned - with state-EPA collaboration and
leveraging success, stakeholder involvement, science
and technical expertise, water monitoring data, and multi-
jurisdictional partnerships - to improve waterquality through
development and implementation of TMDLs.
EPA will track the degree to which states develop TMDLs on
approved schedules, based on a goal of at least 80 percent
on pace each year to meet state schedules or straight-line
rates that ensure that the national policy of TMDL completion
within 8-13 years of listing is met (see Program Activity
Measure WQ-8).
As noted below, EPA is encouraging states to organize
schedules for TMDLs to address all pollutants on an
impaired segment when possible (see Program Activity
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Measure WQ-21). Where multiple impaired segments are
clustered within a watershed, EPA encourages states to
organize restoration activities across the watershed (i.e.,
apply a watershed approach).
d) Implement Practices to Reduce Pollution from all
Nonpoint Sources:
Polluted runoff from sources such as agricultural lands,
forestry sites, and urban areas is the largest single remaining
cause of water pollution. EPA and states are working with
local governments, watershed groups, property owners,
tribes, and others to implement programs and management
practices to control polluted runoff throughout the country.
EPA provides grant funds to states under Section 319 of
the Clean Water Act to implement comprehensive programs
to control nonpoint pollution, including reduction in runoff
of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment. EPA will monitor
progress in reducing loadings of these key pollutants (see
Program Activity Measure WQ-9). In addition, EPA estimates
that some 5,967 waterbodies are primarily impaired by
nonpoint sources and will track progress in restoring these
waters nationwide (see Program Activity Measure WQ-10).
As described in more detail in Section 2 below, EPA is
encouraging states to use the 319 program to support a
more comprehensive, watershed approach to protecting and
restoring water quality. EPA first published in FY 2003 new
grant guidelines for the Section 319 program to require the
use of at least $100 million for developing and implementing
comprehensive watershed plans. These plans are geared
towards restoring impaired waters on a watershed basis
while still protecting high quality and threatened waters as
necessary. EPA has a goal of substantially implementing
many of these plans by 2008. In 2009, EPA will work closely
with and support the many efforts of states, interstate
agencies, tribes, local governments and communities,
watershed groups, and others to develop and implement
their local watershed-based plans. State CWSRF funds
are also available to support efforts to control pollution from
nonpoint sources.
e)
Strengthen the NPDES Permit Program:
The NPDES program requires point sources discharging
to waterbodies to have permits and requires pretreatment
programs to control discharges from industrial facilities to
sewage treatment plants.
In FY2003, EPA worked with states to develop the "Permitting
for Environmental Results Strategy" to address concerns
about the backlog in issuing permits and the health of state
NPDES programs. The strategy focuses limited resources
15
-------
on the most critical environmental problems and addresses
program efficiency and integrity. In FYs 2004 and 2005,
EPA worked with states to assess NPDES program integrity.
In FYs 2005 and 2006, EPA developed a commitment and
tracking system to ensure that NPDES programs implement
follow-up actions resulting from assessments. In FYs 2007
and 2008, EPA will continue to emphasize the importance
of these follow-up actions (see Program Activity Measure
WQ-11). As the Office of Water conducts regional reviews,
EPA does permit quality reviews for states within the region
being reviewed. Additional action items will continue to be
identified and addressed through this process in FYs 2009
and 2010.
EPA is also working with states to structure the permit
program to better support comprehensive protection of
water quality on a watershed basis. Some key elements
of this effort (described in more detail in Section 2 below)
include:
High Priority Permits: In order to simplify the
process and to be more transparent, EPA is
proposing to shift the time period for locking down
the priority permits universe. EPA intends to
work with states to develop the process to achieve
this transition. For changes to the operation of this
measure, see the comments box for Program
Activity Measures WQ-19a and b in Appendix D.
Watershed Trading: permits are an effective
mechanism to facilitate cost-effective pollution
reduction through watershed trading (see Program
Activity Measure WQ-20).
Watershed Permits: organizing permits on a
watershed basis can improve the effectiveness
and efficiency of the program.
Green Infrastructure: EPA is collaborating with
partner organizations on the Green Infrastructure
Action Strategy released in January 2008, to help
incorporate green infrastructure solutions at the
local level to protect water quality from stormwater
and CSOs.
EPA will continue to work with states to set targets for the
percentage of permits that are considered current, with the
goal of assuring that not less than 88% of all permits are
current (see Program Activity Measure WQ-12). In addition,
EPA is working with states to expedite reviews of permit
renewals and modifications for NPDES permits held by
Performance Track facilities.
EPA will work with states to assure that industrial,
construction, and municipal separate storm sewer system
(MS4) facilities are covered by current Phase I and Phase
strategies to protect fresh water
II stormwater permits and to monitor the number of facilities
covered by storm water and CAFO permits (see Program
Activity Measure WQ-13).
EPA and states will monitor the percentage of significant
industrial facilities that have control mechanisms in place
to implement applicable pretreatment requirements prior
to discharging to publicly owned treatment works. EPA
will also monitor the percentage of categorical industrial
facilities in non-pretreatment publicly-owned treatment
works (POTWs) that have control mechanisms in place
to implement applicable pretreatment requirements (see
Program Activity Measure WQ-14).
Finally, EPA will track and report on key measures of
compliance with discharge permits including the percent
of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC),
and the percent of major publicly owned treatment works
(POTWs) that comply with their permitted wastewater
discharge standards (see Program Activity Measures
WQ-15and WQ-16).
f)
Support Sustainable Water Infrastructure:
Much of the dramatic progress in improving water quality
is directly attributable to investment in drinking water and
wastewater infrastructure, but the job is far from over.
Communities are challenged to find the fiscal resources to
replace aging infrastructure, meet growing infrastructure
demands fueled by population growth, and secure their
infrastructure against threats. If these challenges are not
met, rising water pollution levels could erase the gains in
water quality that the Nation has achieved.
Today's challenges require a multi-faceted approach to
managing infrastructure assets. The Nation must embrace
a fundamental change in the way we manage, value, and
invest in infrastructure. EPA is pursuing a Sustainable
Infrastructure Initiative, organized around four principles, or
"pillars":
Better Management - work with utilities and
communities to promote utility management
programs based on attributes of effectively
managed utilities and performance measures
that will help change the paradigm from managing
for compliance to managing forsustainability.
Water Efficiency - promote wise water use by
consumers and utilities through market
enhancement programs for water efficient
products, partnerships, and public education.
Full Cost Pricing - help utilities and communities
recognize the full cost of providing services and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
implement pricing structures that recover these
costs.
The Watershed Approach - help utilities and
other stakeholders use watershed approaches to
think holistically about infrastructure planning,
including drinking water, source water, wastewater,
and stormwater management; and to promote
soft path technologies, such as low impact
development and green infrastructure solutions to
wet weather management.
In pursuing actions under each of these pillars, EPA will be
guided by several cross-cutting themes such as innovation,
collaboration with partners, use of new technology, and
research focused on new tools and techniques. In addition,
EPA will pursue innovative, market-based tools to increase
and accelerate the amount of capital invested in the Nation's
water infrastructure. One focus will be on removing barriers
to private investment in public purpose infrastructure.
EPA is developing measures for the Sustainable
Infrastructure Initiative for inclusion in the National Water
Program Guidance for FY 2010, as well as the 2009-2014
Strategic Plan. Under development are two measures:
Number of utilities achieving recognition as part of
the revised Clean Water Act Awards. (HQ reports)
Number of outreach or training events that
promote Asset Management or Environmental
Management Systems. (Regions report)
Also important to the implementation of the Sustainable
Infrastructure Strategy are the DWSRFs and CWSRFs that
provide low interest loans to help finance drinking water and
wastewater treatment facilities, as well as otherwaterquality
projects. Recognizing the substantial remaining need for
drinking water and wastewater infrastructure, EPA expects
to continue to provide significant annual capitalization to
the SRFs. EPA will work with states to assure the effective
operation of SRFs, including monitoring the fund utilization
rate (see Program Activity Measure WQ-17).
In a related effort, EPA will work with other federal agencies
to improve access to basic sanitation. The 2002 World
Summit in Johannesburg adopted the goal of reducing the
number of people lacking access to safe drinking water and
basic sanitation by 50% by 2015. EPA will contribute to
this work through its support for development of sanitation
facilities in Indian country, Alaskan Native villages, and
Pacific Island communities using funds set aside from the
CWSRF and targeted grants. Other federal agencies, such
as the Department of the Interior (DOI), the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA), and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development, also play key roles in this area and
are working with EPA in this effort. EPA is also working
to improve access to drinking water and wastewater
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
treatment in the Mexico Border area (see Section IV of this
Guidance).
2.
Strong implementation of core Clean Water Act programs
is essential to improving water quality but is not sufficient to
accomplish the water quality improvements called for in the
Agency's Strategic Plan. Today's water quality problems are
often caused by many different and diffuse sources resulting
in an accumulation of problems in a watershed. Addressing
these complex problems demands watershed approaches
that use an iterative planning process to actively seek broad
public involvement and focus multi-stakeholder and multi-
program efforts within hydrologically-defined boundaries to
address priority resource goals.
The National Water Program has successfully used a
watershed approach to focus core program activities and to
promote and support accelerated efforts in key watersheds.
At the largest hydrologic scales, EPA and its partners
operate successful programs addressing the Chesapeake
Bay, Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, and National Estuary
Program watersheds. Many states, EPA regions, and their
partners have also undertaken important efforts to protect,
improve, and restore watersheds at other hydrologic scales.
Together, these projects provide strong evidence of the
value of a comprehensive approach to assessing water
quality, defining problems, integrating management of
diverse pollution controls, and defining financing of needed
projects.
Over the past decade, EPA has witnessed a groundswell
of locally-driven watershed protection and restoration
efforts. Watershed stakeholders, such as citizen groups,
governments, non-profit organizations, and businesses,
have come together and created long-term goals and
innovative solutions to clean up their watersheds and
promote more sustainable uses of their water resources.
EPA estimates that there are approximately 6,000 local
watershed groups active nationwide.
For FY 2009, EPA will continue to implement its National
Strategy for building the capacity of local government and
watershed groups. The Strategy emphasizes three activities
to accelerate local watershed protection efforts:
Target training and tools to areas where existing
groups can deliver environmental results;
Enhance support to local watershed organizations
through third party providers (e.g., federal
partners, EPA assistance agreement recipients);
and
Share best watershed approach management
practices in locations where EPA is not directly
involved.
17
-------
EPA is also working at the national level to develop
partnerships with federal agencies to encourage their
participation in watershed protection and to promote delivery
of their programs on a watershed basis. For example, EPA
will work with USDAto promote coordinated use of federal
resources, including grants under the Clean Water Act
Section 319 and Farm Bill funds. EPA is also working with
the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to foster efficient strategies
to address water quality impairments by maintaining and
restoring National Forest System watersheds. EPA and the
USFS will work to advance a suite of water quality related
actions, including category 4b watershed plans that will
build partnerships between agencies and among states.
In 2002, states identified some 39,503 specific waterbodies
as impaired (i.e., not attaining state waterquality standards)
on lists required under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water
Act. Although core programs contribute to improving these
impaired waters, success in restoring the health of impaired
waterbodies often requires a waterbody-specific focus to
define the problem and implement specific steps needed to
reduce pollution.
Nationally, EPA has adopted a goal of having 2,250 of those
waters identified as attaining water quality standards by
2012 (about 5.7% of all impaired waters identified in 2002).
Regions have indicated the progress they expect to make
toward this goal in FY 2009 (see the following table).
Regional commitments for this measure, to be developed
over the summer of 2008 based on the targets in the table
below, should reflect the best effort by EPA regions
and states to address impaired waters based on
redesigning and refocusing program priorities and
delivery methods where necessary to meet or exceed
this measure's targets. In the event that an EPA regional
office finds that existing program delivery and alignment is
not likely to result in a significant contribution to national
goals, the EPA region should work with states to rethink
and redesign the delivery of clean water programs to more
effectively restore waterbodies and watersheds. Regions
will also develop targets and commitments for progress
under measures related to improvement of impaired waters
short of full standards attainment (see measure SP-11)
and in small watersheds where one or more waterbody is
impaired (see measures SP-12).
(Note that a previous measure reported 1,980 waters
identified as impaired in 1998-2000 to be in attainment by
2002. These are not included in the table above.)
States and EPA regions have indicated that the time frame
for reaching full attainment in formerly impaired waters
can be long and that the significant program efforts to put
restoration plans in place need to be better recognized.
for in
By Region and Nationally (Measure SP-10)
Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Totals
Total Impaired
Waters (2002)
6,710
1,805
8,998
5,274
4,550
1,407
2,036
1,274
1,041
6,408
39,503°
FYs 2002-2007
Waters in
Attainment
69
20
320
260
248
124
209
73
38
48
1,409
FYs 2002-2007
Waters in
Attainment
69/0
25/5
350/30
260/0
309/61
124/0
223/14
96/23
46/8
50/2
1,552d/143
FY 2009 Target
(cumulative/FY
2009 annual)
76/7
84/59
370/20
360/100
309/0
135/11
230/7
96/0
56/10
52/2
1,768/216
FY2012
Target
(cumulative)
137
101
375
496
397
240
250
133
30
100
2,250e
=39,503 updated from 39,768 to reflect corrected data.
"Rounded to 1,550 for FY 2008 in PARTWeb and FY 2009 Budget Congressional Justification (CJ).
"Rounded from 2,259 for FY 2012.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Recognizing this issue, EPA will work with states to report
the number of impaired water segments where restoration
planning will be complete in FY 2009 (see Program Activity
Measure WQ-21). Completion of planning is an essential,
intermediate step toward full restoration of a waterbody and
can be documented more quickly than actual waterbody
improvement. In general, planning for restoration is complete
when each cause of impairment is a waterbody is covered
by one or more of the following: an EPA approved TMDL, a
watershed restoration plan that is an acceptable substitute
for a TMDL, or a statewide mercury reduction program
consistent with EPAguidance. For FY 2009, georeferencing
data will be requested for reported segments.
For some impaired waters, the best path to restoration is
the prompt implementation of a waterbody-specific TMDL
or TMDLs. For many waters, however, the best path to
restoration will be as part of a larger, watershed approach
that results in completion of TMDLs for multiple waterbodies
within a watershed and the development of a single
implementation plan for restoring all the impaired waters
in that watershed. EPA has identified some 4,800 small
watersheds where one or more waterbodies are impaired
and the watershed approach is being applied. Our goal is
to demonstrate how the watershed approach is working by
showing a measurable improvement in 250 such watersheds
by 2012.
Today, the National Water Program has good information
about the number of impaired waters and the status of
TMDLs orwatershed plans forthe restoration of these waters.
Information concerning progress toward implementation of
the pollution controls needed to restore designated uses in
impaired waters is much less complete. To address this
problem, and in response to specific recommendations
contained in an Office of Inspector General audit report in
2007 on TMDLs and other water performance measures,
Total Maximum Daily Load Program Needs Better Data and
Measures to Demonstrate Environmental Results: OIG No.
2007-P-00036, the Office of Water is conducting a detailed
review of options for modifying its data systems to better
track implementation of TMDL waste load allocations in the
permits issued to point source dischargers of pollutants
of concern. The Office of Water will complete that review
by April 30, 2008. By September 30, 2008, the Office of
Water will implement recommended changes to these
datasystems.
In 2008-2009, the Office of Water is also planning to
undertake a statistically-based survey on a stratified random
sample of TMDLs completed through 2007. The sample-
based assessment aims to develop sound estimates of
TMDL implementation rates and other insights about
implementation patterns that, if known, would improve OW
understanding of Clean Water Act program effectiveness
while providing insights that show how to improve
implementation rates. As a first phase in this assessment,
OW will work jointly with ORD and Region 5 on a regional
scale pilot assessment to deliver a regional report on TMDL
implementation rates and effectiveness as well as help
inform and refine the national sample assessment. Data
collected from the pilot is expected to be completed by the
end of 2008. After completing the pilot effort and again
after completing the national, statistical survey of TMDL
implementation, the Office of Water will consider options
for improving the tracking of progress towards achieving
waterbody restoration goals.
Regions are encouraged to use some or all of the following
strategies in marshaling resources to support waterbody
and watershed restoration:
Realign water programs and resources as
needed, including proposal of reductions in
allocations among core water program
implementation as reflected in commitments to
annual program activity measure targets;
Coordinate waterbody restoration efforts with
Section 319 funds reserved for development of
watershed plans;
Make effective use of water quality planning funds
provided under Section 604(b) of the Clean Water
Act;
Make effective use of Regional Geographic
Initiative Funds in the EPA region;
Leverage resources available from other federal
agencies, including the USDA; and
Apply funds appropriated by Congress for
watershed or related projects.
C) Grant Program Resources
Key program grants that support this Subobjective are:
The Clean Water Act Section 106 Water Pollution
Control State Program grants;
The Clean Water Act Section 319 State program
grant for nonpoint pollution control, including set
aside for Tribal programs;
Targeted Watershed Assistance grants;
Alaska Native Village Water and Wastewater
Infrastructure grants;
CWSRF capitalization grants, including set-asides
for planning under Section 604(b) of the Clean
Water Act and for grants to tribes for wastewater
treatment infrastructure.
For additional information on these grants, see the grant
program guidance on the website (http://www.epa.gov/
rpl a n).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
-------
In FY 2009, EPA will continue efforts to work with states to
identify coastal areas which might benefit from the adoption
of "no discharge zones" to control sewage discharges from
vessels. We will track total coastal and noncoastal acres
protected by "no discharge zones" (see Program Activity
Measure CO-2).
3,
the
The NEP provides inclusive, community-based planning
and action at the watershed level, through a collaborative
system of 28 nationally significant estuaries. The NEP is a
highly visible program that plays a critical role in conserving
the Nation's most valuable coastal and ocean resources.
During FY 2009, EPA will continue supporting the efforts
of all 28 NEP estuaries to implement their Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs). One
measure of NEP success is the number of priority actions
(COE) share responsibility for regulating how and where the
disposal of sediment occurs.
EPA and COE will focus on improving how disposal of
dredged material is managed, including designating and
monitoring disposal sites and involving local stakeholders
in planning to reduce the need for dredging (see Program
Activity Measure CO-5). EPA will use the capability provided
by the OSVBoldto monitor compliance with environmental
requirements at ocean disposal sites (see Program Activity
Measure CO-6). In addition, the Strategic Plan includes a
measure of the percent of active dredged material disposal
sites that have achieved environmentally acceptable
conditions (see SP-20).
One of the greatest threats to U.S. ocean waters and
ecosystems is the uncontrolled spread of invasive species.
Invasive species commonly enter U.S. waters through the
discharge of ballast water from ships. In FY 2009, EPA
in the
Albemarle-Pemlico Sounds, NC
Barataria-Terrebonne, LA
Barnegat Bay, NJ
Buzzards Bay, MA
Casco Bay, ME
Charlotte Harbor, FL
Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries, TX
Lower Columbia River, OR/WA
Delaware Estuary, DE/NJ
Delaware Inland Bays, DE
Galveston Bay, TX
Indian River Lagoon, FL
Long Island Sound, NY/CT
Maryland Coastal Bays, MD
Massachusetts Bay, MA
Mobile Bay, AL
Morro Bay, CA
Narragansett Bay, Rl
New Hampshire Estuaries, NH
New York/New Jersey Harbor, NY/NJ
Peconic Bay, NY
Puget Sound, WA
San Francisco Bay, CA
San Juan Bay, PR
Santa Monica Bay, CA
Sarasota Bay, FL
Tampa Bay, FL
Tillamook Bay, OR
in these plans that have been completed. EPA tracks the
number of these priority actions completed (see Program
Activity Measure CO-3) and will work with NEPs to support
continued progress in completion of these key efforts. EPA
also tracks the cumulative dollar amount of the resources
leveraged by EPA grant funds (see Program Activity
Measure CO-4).
The health of the Nation's estuarine ecosystems also
depends on the maintenance of high-quality habitat. As a
result, one of the environmental outcome measures under
the Ocean/Coastal Subobjective is protecting or restoring
additional habitat acres within the NEP study areas. For
FY 2009, EPA has set a goal of protecting or restoring an
additional 75,000 acres of habitat within the NEP areas.
4,
Several hundred million cubic yards of sediment are dredged
from waterways, ports, and harbors every year to maintain
the Nation's navigation system. All of this sediment must be
disposed of without causing adverse effects to the marine
environment. EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
will continue to participate in the Aquatic Invasive Species
Council, work with otheragencies on ballast water discharge
standards or controls, and work with other nations for
effective international management of ballast.
C) Grant Program Resources
Grant resources directly supporting this work include the
National Estuary Program grants and coastal nonpoint
pollution control grants underthe Coastal Nonpoint Pollution
Control Program administered jointly by EPA and the NOAA
(Section 6217 grant program). In addition, clean water
program grants identified underthe watershed subobjective
support this work. For additional information on these
grants, see the grant program guidance on the website
(http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
21
-------
A) Subobjective
Working with partners, achieve a net increase of acres of
wetlands per year with additional focus on biological and
functional measures and assessment of wetland condition.
2005 Baseline: annual net gain of an estimated 32,000
acres per year
2006 Actual: estimated 32,000 acres annual net gain
2007 Actual: estimated 32,000 acres annual net gain
(96,000 cumulative)
2008 Commitment: 100,000 per year (400,000
cumulative)
2009 Target: 100,000 per year (500,000 cumulative)
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key National Strategies
Wetlands are among the Nation's most critical and productive
natural resources. They provide a variety of benefits,
such as water quality improvements, flood protection,
shoreline erosion control, and ground water exchange.
Wetlands are the primary habitat for fish, waterfowl, and
wildlife, and as such, provide numerous opportunities for
education, recreation, and research. EPA recognizes that
the challenges the Nation faces to conserve our wetland
heritage are daunting and that many partners must work
together for this effort to succeed.
Over the years, the United States has lost more than 115
million acres of wetlands to development, agriculture, and
other uses. Today, the Nation may be entering a period of
annual net gain of wetlands acres for some wetland classes.
Still, many wetlands in the U.S. are in less than pristine
condition and many created wetlands, while beneficial,
fail to replace the diverse plant and animal communities of
wetlands lost.
The 2006 National Wetlands Inventory Status and Trends
Report, released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS), reports the quantity and type of wetlands in the
conterminous United States. Although the report shows
that overall gains in wetland acres exceeded overall losses
from 1998 through 2004, this gain is primarily attributable
to an increase in un-vegetated freshwater ponds, some
of which (such as aquaculture ponds) may not provide
wetlands services and others of which may have varying
ecosystem value. The report notes the following trends in
other wetland categories: freshwater vegetated wetlands
declined by 0.5%, a smaller rate of loss than in preceding
years; and estuarine vegetated wetlands declined by 0.7%,
an increased rate of loss from the preceding years. The
report does not assess the quality or condition of wetlands.
EPA is working with FWS and other federal agencies to
produce a National Wetland Condition Assessment in 2011
to effectively complement the FWS Status and Trends
Reports and provide, for the first time, a snapshot of baseline
wetland condition for the conterminous U.S.
The President's Earth Day 2004 Wetlands Initiative
announced a performance-based goal to restore, enhance,
and protect at least three million wetland acres over the next
five years. In support of this goal, EPA and other federal
agencies will continue to work closely with federal, state,
tribal, local, and private entities to implement a coordinated
program to protect wetlands.
EPA's Wetlands Program combines technical and financial
assistance to state, tribal and local partners with outreach
and education and wetlands regulation under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act for the purpose of restoring, improving
and protecting wetlands in the U.S. Objectives of EPA's
strategy include helping states and tribes build wetlands
protection program capacity and integrating wetlands and
watershed protection. EPA's Wetlands Program is currently
undertaking a national collaborative program planning effort
to devise national strategies in the areas of monitoring,
state and tribal capacity, regulatory program, jurisdictional
determinations, and restoration partnerships. This planning
effort will move forward within the context of the strategic
goals and program measures outlined in this guidance.
1.
EPA contributes to achieving no overall net loss of wetlands
through the Wetlands regulatory program established under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) and EPA jointly administer the
Section 404 program, which regulates the discharge of
dredged or fill material into waters of the United States,
including wetlands.
EPA will continue to work with COE to ensure application
of the 404(b)(1) guidelines which require that discharges of
dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. be avoided
and minimized to the extent practicable and unavoidable
impacts are compensated. In FY 2009, EPA will track the
effectiveness of EPA's environmental review of CWA Section
404 permits (see Program Activity Measure WT-3). Each
EPA region will also identify opportunities to partner with the
Corps in meeting performance measures for compliance
with 404(b)(1) guidelines. At a minimum, these include:
-------
Environmental review of CWA Section 404 permits
to ensure wetland impacts are avoided and
minimized;
Ensure when wetland impacts cannot be avoided
under CWA Section 404 permits, that the
unavoidable impacts are compensated for;
Participation in joint impact and mitigation site
inspections, and Mitigation Bank Review Team
activities;
Assistance on development of mitigation site
performance standards and monitoring protocols;
and
Enhanced coordination on resolution of
enforcement cases.
Meeting the "net gain" element of the wetland goal is
primarily accomplished by other federal programs (Farm
Bill agriculture incentive programs and wetlands acquisition
and restoration programs, including those administered by
FWS) and non-federal programs. EPA will work to improve
levels of wetland protection by states and other federal
programs through actions that include:
Working with and integrating wetlands protection
into other EPA programs such as Clean Water Act
Section 319, State Revolving Fund, National
Estuary Program, and Brownfields;
Providing grants and technical assistance to state,
tribal, or local organizations;
Developing information, education and outreach
tools; and
Collaboration with USDA, DOI, NOAA, and other
federal agencies with wetlands restoration
programs to ensure the greatest environmental
outcomes.
For FY 2009, EPA expects to track the following key
activities for accomplishing its wetland goals:
President's Initiative -Among the several federal agencies
working to meet the President's wetlands goal, EPA's
commitment is to achieve an increase of at least 6,000 acres
of restored wetlands and 6,000 acres of enhanced wetlands
over the five-year period (1,200 acres per year in each
category). EPA will track this commitment as a sub-set of
the overall net gain goal and will track and report the results
separately under Program Activity Measure WT-1. These
acres may include those supported by Wetland Five-Star
Restoration Grants, the National Estuary Program, Section
319 nonpoint source grants, Brownfield grants, EPA's Great
Waterbody Programs, and other EPA programs. This does
not include enforcement or mitigation acres. EPA greatly
exceeded its target forthis Program Activity Measure in 2005
and 2006, mainly due to unexpected accomplishments from
National Estuary Program enhancement projects. However,
because EPA cannot assume such significant results each
year, the target will be at 88,000 acres for FY 2009.
State/Tribal Programs: Akey activity is building the capacity
of states and tribes in wetland monitoring, regulation,
restoration, water quality standards, mitigation compliance,
and partnership building. Program Activity Measure WT-2
is meant to reflect EPA's goal of increasing state and tribal
capacity in wetlands protection. In reporting progress under
the measure, EPA will be looking for substantial progress
toward the state or tribe's wetland program development in
three of the six elements of the measure (i.e., monitoring,
regulation, restoration, water quality standards, mitigation
compliance, and partnership building) during the last three
years.
The Wetland Demonstration Pilot is a three-year (FYs
2005-2007) trial to assess the programmatic and
environmental outcomes states/tribes can achieve when
Wetland grants are targeted at program implementation.
Special dispensation was given for this three-year
demonstration for CWA 104(b)(3) funds to support
implementation activities. In FY 2009, EPA will receive
the final reports from states and tribes and assess the
environmental outcomes that were achieved under the
Implementation Pilot.
Regulatory Program Performance: In 2006 and 2007,
EPA and the Corps of Engineers partnered to develop
and refine a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit database
(ORM 2.0) that enables more insightful data collection on
the performance of the Section 404 regulatory program.
Using ORM 2.0 as a data source, Program Activity Measure
WT-3 documents the annual percentage of 404 standard
permits where EPA coordinated with the permitting
authority and that coordination resulted in an environmental
improvement in the final permit decision. This measure will
remain an indicator until enough data is collected to define
a meaningful target.
Wetland Monitoring: In March 2003, EPA released
guidance to states outlining the Elements of a State Water
Monitoring and Assessment Program. The guidance
recommended including wetlands as part of that program.
This was followed in April of 2006 by release of an
"Elements" document specific to wetlands to help EPA and
state program managers plan and implement a wetland
monitoring and assessment program within their water
monitoring and assessment programs. Also, in 2006 EPA re-
initiated the National Wetlands Monitoring and Assessment
Work Group to provide national leadership in implementing
state and tribal wetlands monitoring strategies. The Work
Group will also play a prominent role in informing design of
the National Wetland Condition Assessment, scheduled for
fieldworkin 2011.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
23
-------
strategies to protect fresh waters,
coastal waters, and wetlands
EPA will continue to work with states and tribes to build the
capability to monitor trends in wetland condition as defined
through biological metrics and assessments. By the end
of FY 2009, at least 19 states will be on track to measure
and report baseline wetland condition in the state using
condition indicators and assessments (see Program Activity
Measure WT-4). States should also have plans to eventually
document trends in wetland condition overtime. Examples
of activities indicating the state is "on track" include, but are
not limited to:
building technical and financial capacity to conduct
an "intensification study" as part of the 2011
National Wetland Condition Assessment;
developing or adapting wetland assessment tools
for use in the state;
monitoring activity is underway for wetland type(s)
watershed(s) stated in strategy or goals; and
developing a monitoring strategy with one goal of
evaluating baseline wetland condition.
Baseline condition may be established using landscape
assessment (Tier I), rapid assessment (Tier 2), or intensive
site assessment (Tier 3).
C) Grant Program Resources
Examples of grant resources supporting this work include
the Wetland Program Development Grants, Five Star
Restoration Grants, the Clean Water Act Section 319
Grants, the Brownfields grants, and the National Estuary
Program Grants. For additional information on these grants,
see the grant program guidance on the website (http://www.
In addition, some states and
tribes have utilized Clean Water Action Section 106 funds
for program implementation, including wetlands monitoring
and protection projects.
U.S. bnvironmental Protection Agency
-------
The core programs of the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking
Water Act are essential for the protection of the Nation's
drinking water and fresh waters, coastal waters, and
wetlands. At the same time, additional, intergovernmental
efforts are sometimes needed to protect and restore large
aquatic ecosystems around the county. For many years,
EPA has worked with state and local governments, tribes,
and others to implement supplemental programs to restore
and protect the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, the Gulf
of Mexico, and the waters along the Mexico Border. More
recently EPA has developed new, cooperative initiatives
addressing Long Island Sound, South Florida, Puget Sound,
the Columbia River, and the waters of the Pacific Islands.
1.
A) Subobjective
Sustain and restore the environmental health along the
U.S.-Mexico Border through the implementation of the
Border 2012 Plan.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Strategies
The United States and Mexico have a long-standing
commitment to protect the environment and public health
in the U.S.-Mexico Border region. The basic approach to
improving the environment and public health in the U.S.-
Mexico Border region is the Border 2012 Plan. Under
this Plan, EPA expects to take the following key Actions to
improve water quality and protect public health.
1.
EPA will continue to implement core programs under the
Clean Water Act and related authorities, ranging from
discharge permit issuance, to watershed restoration, to
nonpoint pollution control.
Financing:
Federal, state, and local institutions participate in borderarea
.
efforts to improve water quality through the construction of
infrastructure and development of pretreatment programs.
Specifically, Mexico's National Water Commission (CNA)
and EPA provide funding and technical assistance for
project planning and construction of infrastructure.
Congress has provided $953 million for Border infrastructure
from 1994 to 2008. For FY 2009, EPA expects to be able to
provide approximately $10 million forthese projects. EPA will
continue working with all its partners to leverage available
resources to meet priority needs. The FY 2009 target will
be achieved through the completion of prioritized Border
Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF) drinking water
and wastewater infrastructure projects. Future progress in
meeting this subobjective will be achieved through other
border drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects
as well as through the collaborative efforts established
through the Border 2012 Water Task Forces.
3,
ps:
Partnerships are critical to the success of efforts to improve
the environment and public health in the U.S.-Mexico
Border region. Since 1995, the NAFTA-created institutions,
the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC)
and the North American Development Bank (NADB), have
had the primary role in working with communities to develop
and construct environmental infrastructure projects. BECC
and NADB support efforts to evaluate, plan, and implement
financially and operationally sustainable drinking water and
wastewater projects. EPA will continue to support these
institutions.
>V6
During FY 2009, EPA will work with Mexico, states, tribes,
and other institutions to improve measures of progress
toward water quality and public health goals.
C) Grant Program Resources
A range of program grants are used by states to implement
core programs in the U.S.-Mexico Border region for waters
in the U.S. only. Allocations of the funding available for
infrastructure projects are not provided through guidance, but
through a collaborative and public prioritization process.
\ • >' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
""'"""'' •' '.>•«, - ™ - **
A) Subobjective
Sustain and restore the environmental health of the U.S.
Pacific Island Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Program Strategies
The U.S. island territories of Guam, American Samoa,
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
struggle to provide adequate drinking water and sanitation
service. For example, the island of Saipan in the Northern
Marianas, with a population of about 70,000, may be the only
municipality of its size in the United States without 24-hour
drinking water. When residents of Saipan do get water
(many receive only a few hours per day of water service),
it is too salty to drink. In the Pacific Island territories, poor
wastewater conveyance and treatment systems threaten
to contaminate drinking water wells and surface waters.
Island beaches, with important recreational, economic, and
cultural significance, are frequently polluted and placed
under advisories.
One of the root causes of drinking water and sanitation
problems in the U.S. Pacific Island territories is inadequate
and crumbling infrastructure. Recent studies estimate that
it would take over one billion dollars in capital investments
to bring the Pacific territories drinking water and wastewater
systems up to U.S. standards. EPA is targeting innovative
infrastructure financing, enforcement, and technical
assistance to improve the drinking water and wastewater
situation in the Pacific Islands. In pursuing these actions,
EPAwill continue to use the available resources and to work
with partners at both the federal and local levels to seek
improvements.
Innovative Financing: EPA is working in
partnership with the U.S. Department of the
Interior to create a U.S. Territories Bond Bank for
the Pacific territories and the U.S. Virgin Islands or
a special low-interest loan program for the
Territories. The bond bank would make it easier
and less expensive for the territories to secure
bonds while the special program would be a direct
low-interest loan. Either approach could address
large-scale infrastructure needs.
•.'*»».,
V
Enforcement: EPAwill continue to oversee
implementation of judicial and administrative
orders to improve drinking water and wastewater
systems. For example, as a result of
implementation of a 2003 Stipulated Order under
the federal district court in Guam, wastewater
spills in Guam in 2006 were down by 90%
compared to 2002; and no island-wide boil water
notices were issued in 2005 or 2006 compared to
nearly every month in 2002. EPAwill continue to
assess judicial and administrative enforcement as
a tool to improve water and wastewater service.
Technical Assistance: EPAwill continue to use
technical assistance to improve the operation
of drinking water and wastewater systems in the
Pacific Islands. In addition to periodic on-site
training, EPAwill continue to use the IPA
(Intergovernmental Personnel Act) to build
capacity in the Islands to protect public health and
the environment. For example, in 2006 and 2007,
EPA placed U.S. Public Health Service drinking
water engineers in key positions within Pacific
island water utilities and within local regulatory
agencies.
Guam Military Expansion: EPAwill continue
to partner with the Department of Defense in its
Guam Military Expansion project to improve the
environmental infrastructure on Guam. The U.S
and Japan have agreed to relocate the Marine
Base from Okinawa, Japan to Guam. By 2014,
the relocation could result in approximately 10,000
additional troops and upwards of 35,000 additional
people on Guam (a 26% increase in population
while spending $10 - $15 billion on construction.
This military expansion is an opportunity to
significantly improve the environmental
infrastructure on Guam.
C) Grant Program Resources
A range of grants funds and set-asides from the national
State Revolving Fund (SRF) appropriation are available to
implement projects to improve water infrastructure in the
Pacific Islands. EPA currently provides about $5 million total
to the Pacific territories in drinking water and wastewater
grants annually through the SRF programs.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
strategies to protect t
large aquatic ecosystems *«.*?
A) Subobjective
Improve the overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by
preventing water pollution and protecting aquatic ecosystem
(using the Great Lakes 40-point scale).
2005 Baseline:
2006 Result:
2007 Result:
2008 Commitment:
2009 Target:
2011 Target:
21.5 points
21.1
22.7
22
22.5
23f
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Strategies
As the largest surface freshwater system on the face of
the earth, the Great Lakes ecosystem holds the key to the
quality of life and economic prosperity for tens of millions
of people. While significant progress has been made to
restore the environmental health of the Great Lakes, much
work remains to be done.
In May 2004, President Bush signed a Presidential
Executive Order recognizing the Great Lakes as a national
treasure, calling forthe creation of a "Regional Collaboration
of National Significance" and a cabinet-level interagency
Task Force. The President's May 2004 Executive Order
established the EPA Administrator as the chair of a ten-
member Great Lakes Interagency Task Force, one purpose
of which is to ensure that their programs are funding
effective, coordinated, and environmentally sound activities
in the Great Lakes system.
More than 1,500 people representing federal, state, local
and tribal governments; nongovernmental entities; and
private citizens participated in the Great Lakes Regional
Collaboration (GLRC) on eight issue-specific Strategy
Teams to develop a Great Lakes Regional Collaboration
Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes, presented
in December 2005. Teams focused on:
Aquatic Invasive Species
Habitat/Species
Coastal Health
Areas of Concern/Sediments
Nonpoint Source
Toxic Pollutants
Indicators and Information
Sustainable Development
EPA and the Interagency Task Force are using the Strategy
as a guide for Great Lakes protection and restoration.
The Administration is implementing near term actions that
address issues in all eight of the priority areas identified in
the Strategy. Highlights include:
Continued implementation of the Great Lakes
Legacy Act to remediate contaminated sediments
in Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
Implementation of a communication network
among federal agencies to coordinate response
to newly identified aquatic invasive species in
response to requests for assistance from state or
local authorities, including rapid assessment of
needed actions and prompt determination of
who has the resources and expertise to assist in
taking action.
Establishment of a forum that includes other
federal agencies, states, and non-governmental
organizations to support the GLRC goal of
protecting and restoring 200,000 acres of wetlands
by accomplishing three things: enhanced
coordination; improved accountability; and
accelerated actions. Attendant activities will
include work with forum members to update the
Great Lakes Habitat Initiative's database of
potential habitat restoration projects and funding
programs.
Implementation of pilots by state and local
governments using a standardized sanitary survey
form for beach assessments.
Surveillance for emerging chemicals of concern.
The IATF created the Wetlands Subcommittee
and the Aquatic Invasive Species Rapid Response
Subcommittee to improve interagency coordination
on two high priority areas forthe Great Lakes.
Both subcommittees are also bringing in non
federal partners through joint projects in
cooperation with the Great Lakes Regional
Collaboration.
Progress under the Great Lakes Strategy is dependent
on continued work to implement core Clean Water Act
The long-term target was changed to 23.5 in the 2007 OMB PART review.
TV*' ' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
27
-------
programs. These programs provide a foundation of water
pollution control that is critical to the success of efforts
to restore and protect the Great Lakes. While the Great
Lakes face a range of unique pollution problems (extensive
sediment contamination and atmospheric deposition) they
also face problems common to most other waterbodies
around the country. Effective implementation of core
programs, such as discharge permits, nonpoint pollution
controls, wastewater treatment, wetlands protection, and
appropriate designation of uses and criteria, must be fully
and effectively implemented throughout the Great Lakes
Basin.
In addition, forthe Great Lakes Basin, EPA will focus on two
key measures of core program implementation: improving
the quality of major discharge permits and implementing the
national Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Policy. In the
case of discharge permits, EPA has a goal of assuring that
by FY 2009, 96% of the major, permitted discharges to the
Lakes or major tributaries have permits that reflect water
quality standards to implement the Great Lakes Guidance
(see Program Activity Measure GL-1). This is a significant
increase from the 2002 baseline of 61.6%. In the case of the
CSO Policy, EPA has a long-term goal of 100% of permits
with schedules in place in permits or other enforceable
mechanisms to implement approved Long Term Control
Plans. This measure is being re-classified to be consistent
with a comparable National measure. The FY 2009 target
is 90% of permits consistent with the Policy (see Program
Activity Measure GL-2).
Making recreational waters of the Great Lakes safe for
swimming is a common goal of the EPA Strategic Plan and
other EPA regional and Great Lakes plans. In FY 2007,
EPA worked with states to both improve the state water
quality standards for bacteria in recreational waters and to
implement the BEACH Act (see Water Safe for Swimming,
Section 3 of this Guidance). EPA has a goal of assuring
that 100% of high priority beaches around the Great Lakes
continue to be served by water quality monitoring and
public notification programs consistent with the BEACH
Act guidance (see Program Activity Measure GL-3). EPAs
Great Lakes National Program Office will continue to work
with EPA regions and states to make and track progress
toward a goal of 90% of monitored, high priority Great Lakes
beaches meeting bacteria standards more than 95% of the
swimming season.
Following intensive ship- and land-based monitoring of
Lakes Michigan, Superior, and Huron from CY2005 through
CY 2007, EPA will focus on similar cooperative monitoring
efforts with Canada on Lake Ontario in CY 2008 and on
Lake Erie in CY 2009. In FY 2009, EPA plans to initiate
nearshore chemical and biological monitoring of the 10,000
miles of Great Lakes nearshore waters. EPA will thus collect
better information related to the most productive of the Great
Lakes waters, intakes, outfalls, and beaches.
V
C) Grant Program Resources:
The Great Lakes National Program Office negotiates
grants resources with states and tribes, focusing on joint
priorities for Lakewide Management Plans and Remedial
Action Plans. The Great Lakes National Program Office
issues awards for monitoring the environmental condition
of the Great Lakes, and also issues solicitations for projects
furthering protection and clean up of the Great Lakes
ecosystem. Priorities are expected to include Contaminated
Sediments; Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction;
Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration; Invasive
Species; Strategic or Emerging Issues, such as the
disappearance of diporeia at the base of the food web;
and specific Lakewide Management Plan or Remedial
Action Plan (LaMP/RAP) Priorities. Additional information
concerning these resources is provided in the grant program
guidance website
This website also links to information requesting proposals
for monitoring and evaluation of contaminated sediments
or for remediation of contaminated sediments, a non-grant
program pursuant to the Great Lakes Legacy Act.
A) Subobjective
Prevent water pollution and protect aquatic systems so that
the overall aquatic system health of the Chesapeake Bay is
improved.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Strategies
EPAs Chesapeake Bay work is based on a collaborative
regional partnership formed to direct and conduct restoration
of the Bay and its tidal tributaries. Partners include EPA
as the federal government representative; the Chesapeake
Bay Commission, a tri-state legislative body; Maryland;
Virginia; Pennsylvania; Delaware; New York; West Virginia;
the District of Columbia; and participating citizen advisory
groups. Chesapeake 2000, a comprehensive and far-
reaching agreement, guides restoration and protection
efforts through 2010, and focuses on improving water
quality. The challenge is to reduce pollution and restore
aquatic habitat to the extent that the Bay's waters can be
removed from the Clean Water Act "impaired waters" list.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
v,/
The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) has shown how federal
agencies and states can work together collaboratively. The
greatest success in the last five years has been the water
quality initiative, which has resulted in:
New water quality standards for the Bay and its
tidal tributaries that protect living resources and
are both more attainable and more valid
scientifically, incorporating innovative features
such as habitat zoning and adoption of area
specific submerged aquatic vegetation acreage
targets;
Adoption of nutrient and sediment allocations for
all parts of the watershed, to meet the new
standards, which reflect a consensus of all six
basin states, the District of Columbia, and EPA;
Tributary-specific pollution reduction and habitat
restoration plans ("tributary strategies") which
spell out the treatment technologies, best
management practices (BMPs), and restoration
goals for riparian forest buffers and wetlands
which must be employed to achieve the
allocations; and
A common National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permitting approach
for all significant wastewater treatment facilities
that unites both upstream and downstream states
in the enforcement of the new water quality
standards and allocations, including
implementation of watershed permitting and
nutrient trading.
Progress on Bay restoration must be accelerated
substantially as the restoration goal of 2010 approaches.
EPA remains firmly committed to the 2010 goal and will
continue working with other Bay Program partners to
identify additional opportunities to accelerate progress and
ensure that water quality objectives are achieved as soon
as possible. The water quality standards and permitting
approach, which applies to over 450 facilities basin
wide, will speed up nutrient reductions from wastewater
facilities. To maximize the federal investment, EPA places
a premium on improving access to available assistance
programs and targeting them to measures that yield the
greatest water quality benefit for the expenditure, as well as
using innovative approaches such as nutrient trading and
watershed permitting programs.
CBP partners are emphasizing implementation of the
most cost-effective BMPs, using the Program's analytical
capability. Priorities for funding restoration efforts were
established by CBP leaders in 2005 to help focus available
resources. EPA and its partners are also funding watershed
projects to test the effectiveness of key nonpoint source
BMPs and spur innovations such as better technology
and market incentives. In order to accelerate the pace of
water quality and aquatic habitat restoration, EPA and Bay
area states are taking a number of steps to make the most
cost-effective use of available regulatory, incentive and
partnership tools, including the following key actions for FY
2009.
Fully implement base clean water programs in
the Bay. Core CWA programs provide a
foundation of water pollution control and wetlands
protection that is critical to protecting and restoring
Chesapeake Bay tidal waters. Clean Air Act
regulations controlling emissions of nitrogen
compounds also contribute substantially to Bay
restoration.
Support implementation of watershed permitting
and nutrient trading programs. A 2005 study
identified ways to use EPA's regulatory authorities
more effectively to advance Bay restoration,
and these recommendations are being
implemented. EPA and watershed states will set
stronger nutrient limits for wastewater facilities
under the Chesapeake Bay permitting approach,
increasing the use of SRF low-interest loans for
financing municipal wastewater treatment
improvements. New NPDES Concentrated Animal
Feeding Operation (CAFO) permit requirements
will be put in place. To curb urban/suburban storm
water loads and damage to the watershed's
carrying capacity from rapidly increasing
impervious surface acreage and loss of riparian
buffers, EPA will cooperate with partners to
strengthen implementation of NPDES municipal
separate storm sewer systems (MS4) and
construction permit requirements.
Accelerate Bay cleanup by focusing on the most
cost-effective nutrient-sediment control and key
habitat restoration strategies. The states' pollution
control and habitat restoration strategies (tributary
strategies) define specific, localized approaches
for reducing nutrient and sediment loads from
agricultural operations, the largest category of
sources. They emphasize agricultural BMPs such
as nutrient management, low/no-till cultivation,
cover crops, and forest buffer restoration, which
are among the most cost-effective of all measures
for controlling nutrient-sediment pollution loads.
EPA and state partners will integrate tributary
strategy implementation with Farm Bill programs.
Enhance use of monitoring, modeling and
demonstration projects to target and assess the
effectiveness of restoration actions. EPA is
upgrading its watershed modeling capability, to
improve tributary strategy planning and
assessment. The Chesapeake Bay Phase 5
Watershed Model is being calibrated and verified
for management application. EPA and U.S. Army
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Corps of Engineers are upgrading the Chesapeake
Bay water quality model and are cooperating with
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
and U.S. Department of Agriculture to organize an
assessment of regional sediment management.
Strengthen accountability for implementation
of restoration measures. In 2006 and 2007, the
CBP substantially revised its indicators and
reporting for Chesapeake Bay health and
restoration, both to improve accountability and
to respond to recommendations from the
Government Accountability Office (GAO). The
indicators will be expanded in 2008-2009 to
include tributary health and restoration reporting.
EPA, NOAA, and the states will collaborate on
improved integration of water quality and fisheries
monitoring and reporting under the CBP's
precedent setting agreement in 2005 to establish
ecosystem-based fisheries management for the
Chesapeake Bay.
Use the CBP federal partnership for cooperative
conservation to improve access to available
financial and technical assistance programs, and
link federal programs to CBP's strategic priorities.
EPA and the Bay states will strengthen
partnerships with complementary federal agency
programs that fund agricultural conservation and
ecosystem restoration, manage lands and
fisheries,and contribute to Bay scientific
understanding.
The CPB completed a PART review in 2006 and achieved a
"moderately effective" rating. New performance measures
developed for the FY 2006 PART assessments are
included in the FY 2009 budget request. Follow-up actions
in the improvement plan include: investigating potential
methods to characterize the uncertainty of the watershed
and water quality models, developing a comprehensive
implementation strategy, and promoting and tracking the
most cost effective restoration activities to maximize water
quality improvements.
In response to the PART improvement plan actions,
recommendations from the GAO and Congressional report
language to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008,
the CBP is developing a Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP).
The CAP will enhance coordination and integration of
CBP partner activities to restore the Chesapeake Bay and
watershed and to better relate CBP partner activities to
environmental progress and results. The CAP will include
detailed information on all activities undertaken by CBP
partners, which will be used to support development of an
overarching operating plan for the CBP and will integrate
management and alignment of CBP partner activities.
C) Grant Program Resources
Grant resources supporting this goal include the Chesapeake
Bay Implementation and Monitoring Grants under Section
117 of the Clean Water Act, as well as a range of program
grants to states. A website provides information about grants
progress toward meeting environmental results (http://www.
epa.gov/region3/chesapeake/grants/progress.htm).
A) Subobjective
Improve the overall health of coastal waters of the Gulf of
Mexico (by 0.2) on the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National
Coastal Condition Report (a 5-point system in which 1 is
poor and 5 is good):
2004 Baseline: 2.4
2007 Actual: 2.4
2008 Commitment: 2.5
2009 Target: 2.5
2011 Target: 2.6
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Strategies
The Gulf of Mexico basin has been called "America's
Watershed." Its U.S. coastline is 1,630 miles; it is fed by
thirty-three major rivers, and it receives drainage from 31
states in addition to a similar drainage area from Mexico.
One sixth of the U.S. population now lives in Gulf Coast
states, and the region is experiencing remarkably rapid
population growth. In addition, the Gulf yields approximately
forty percent of the Nation's commercial fishery landings,
and Gulf Coast wetlands comprise about half the national
total and provide critical habitat for seventy-five percent of
the migratory waterfowl traversing the United States.
For FY 2009, EPA is working with states and other partners
to support attainment of environmental and health goals
that align with the Gulf of Mexico Governors'Action Plan
developed by the Gulf States Alliance, a partnership of the
five Gulf states (see Program Activity Indicator GM-3). The
Alliance has identified issues that are regionally significant
and can be effectively addressed through increased
collaboration at the local, state, and federal levels. These
activities fall into five categories:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
••Si •
for
The Clean Water Act provides authority and resources that
are essential to protecting water quality in the Gulf of Mexico
and in the larger Mississippi River Basin that contributes
pollution, especially oxygen demanding nutrients, to the
Gulf. EPAregions and the Gulf of Mexico Program Office will
work with states to continue to maximize the efficiency and
utility of water quality monitoring efforts for local managers
by coordinating and standardizing state and federal water
quality data collection activities in the Gulf region and to
assure the continued effective implementation of core clean
water programs, ranging from discharge permits, to nonpoint
pollution controls, to wastewater treatment, to protection of
wetlands.
A central pillar of the strategy to restore the health of the
Gulf is restoration of water quality and habitat in 13 priority
coastal watersheds. These 13 watersheds include 812 of
the impaired segments identified by states around the Gulf
and will receive targeted technical and financial assistance
to restore impaired waters. The 2009 goal is to fully attain
water quality standards in at least 96 of these segments
(see Program Activity Measure SP-38).
Harmful algal blooms (HABs) cause public health advisories,
halt commercial and recreational shellfish harvesting, limit
recreation, exacerbate human respiratory problems, and
cause fish kills. EPA is working with Mexico and the Gulf
states to implement an advanced detection forecasting
capability system to manage harmful algal blooms and
for notifying public health managers (see Program Activity
Measure GM-1) and expects to expand the system in 2009
to include the additional Mexican State of Campeche.
The Gulf of Mexico Program Office has a long-standing
commitment to develop effective partnerships with other
programs within EPA, in other federal agencies, and with
other organizations. For example, the Program Office is
working with the EPA Office of Research and Development
and other federal agencies to develop and implement a
coastal monitoring program to better assess the condition
of Gulf waters.
Restoration
Another key element of the strategy for improving the
water quality in the Gulf is to restore, enhance, or protect
a significant number of acres of coastal and marine habitat.
The overall wetland loss in the Gulf area is on the order
of fifty percent, and protection of the critical habitat that
remains is essential to the health of the Gulf aquatic system.
EPA has a goal of restoring 20,600 acres of habitat by 2009
(see Program Activity Measure SP-39). EPA is working with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
the NOAA, environmental organizations, the Gulf of Mexico
Foundation, and area universities to identify and restore
critical habitat. The Gulf Alliance will enhance cooperative
planning and programs across the Gulf states and federal
agencies to protect wetland and estuarine habitat.
3, of
The Gulf Coast supports a diverse array of coastal,
estuarine, nearshore and offshore ecosystems, including
seagrass beds, wetlands and marshes, mangroves, barrier
islands, sand dunes, coral reefs, maritime forests, bayous,
streams, and rivers. These ecosystems provide numerous
ecological and economic benefits including water quality,
nurseries forfish, wildlife habitat, hurricane and flood buffers,
erosion prevention, stabilized shorelines, tourism, jobs, and
recreation. The Gulf of Mexico contributes U.S. commercial
fish landings estimated annually at more than $1 billion
and as much as 30 percent of U.S. saltwater recreation
fishing trips. The ability to evaluate the extent and quality
of these habitats is critical to successfully managing them
for sustainability, as well as better determining threats from
hurricanes and storm surge. The long-term partnership
goal for the Alliance is to identify, inventory, and assess
the current state of and trends in priority coastal, estuarine,
near-shore, and offshore Gulf of Mexico habitats to inform
resource management decisions. The Gulf of Mexico
Program is working with NOAA, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, and the U.S. Geological Survey in support of
this goal.
4, in to
Healthy estuaries and coastal wetlands depend on a
balanced level of nutrients. Excessive nutrient levels can
have negative impacts such as reducing the abundance
of recreationally and commercially important fishery
species. Over the next several years, the Gulf states will be
establishing criteria for nutrients in coastal ecosystems that
will guide regulatory, land use, and water quality protection
decisions. In 2009, EPA will support coastal nutrient criteria
and standards development with a Gulf state pilot. Because
the five Gulf states face similar nutrient management
challenges at both the estuary level and as the receiving
water for the entire Mississippi River watershed, the Gulf
of Mexico Alliance is an important venue to build and test
management tools to reduce nutrients in Gulf waters and
achieve healthy and resilient coastal ecosystems.
Any strategy to improve the overall health of the entire Gulf
of Mexico must include a focused effort to reduce the size of
the zone of hypoxic conditions (i.e., low oxygen in the water)
in the northern Gulf. Actions to address this problem must
focus on both localized pollutant addition throughout the
Basin and on nutrient loadings from the Mississippi River.
31
-------
EPA, in cooperation with states and other federal agencies,
developed an Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating and
Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (Draft
2008). This Action Plan includes as a goal the long-term
target to reduce the size of the hypoxic zone from about
14,000 square km to less than 5,000 square km. measured
as a five-year running average (see Program Activity
Measure SP-40). In working to accomplish this goal, EPA,
states, and other federal agencies, such as USDA, will
continue implementation of core clean water programs and
partnerships and efforts to coordinate allocation of technical
assistance and funding to priority areas around the Gulf.
Specifically, in FY 2009, EPA will support efforts to reduce
nutrient loadings to watersheds and reduce the size of the
hypoxic zone by identifying the top 100 nutrient-contributing
watersheds in the Mississippi River Basin and using the
U.S. Geological Survey SPARROW (SPAtially Referenced
Regressions on Watershed) model to indicate where the
major sources of nitrogen and phosphorus are located and
where to target reduction efforts. EPA will establish effective
watershed partnerships with the Sub-Basin or states to
facilitate voluntary nutrient reduction, including working with
states to: (1) develop nitrogen and phosphorus reduction
strategies; (2) coordinate, consolidate and improve access
to data collected by states on Gulf hypoxia; and (3) identify
and quantify the effects of the hypoxic zone on the economic,
human and natural resources in the Mississippi/Atchafalaya
River Basin and the Northern Gulf of Mexico.
5.
Education and outreach are essential to accomplish the
Gulf of Mexico Alliance's overall goals and are integral to
the other four Alliance priority issues. It is critical that Gulf
residents and decision makers understand and appreciate
the connection between the ecological health of the Gulf of
Mexico and its watersheds and coasts, their own health,
the economic vitality of their communities, and their overall
quality of life. There is a nationwide need for a better
understanding of the link between the health of the Gulf
of Mexico and the U.S. economy. The long-term Alliance
partnership goal is to increase awareness and stewardship
of Gulf coastal resources.
C) Grant Program Resources
The Gulf of Mexico Program issues an annual competitive
Funding Announcement for Gulf of Mexico Alliance Regional
Partnership projects that improve the health of the Gulf of
Mexico by addressing improved water quality and public
health, priority coastal habitat protection/recovery, more
effective coastal environmental education, improved habitat
identification/characterization data and decision support
systems, and strategic nutrient reductions. Projects must
actively involve stakeholders and focus on support and
implementation of the Gulf of Mexico Alliance Governors'
Action Plan for Healthy and Resilient Coasts.
For additional information on these grants, see the grant
program guidance on the website (http://www.epa.gov/
gmpo).
A) SUBOBJECTIVE
Prevent water pollution, improve water quality, protect
aquatic ecosystems, and restore habitat of Long Island
Sound.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Program Strategies
More than 20 million people live within 50 miles of Long Island
Sound's shores and more than one billion gallons per day of
treated effluent enter the Sound from 106 treatment plants.
In a 1992 study, it was estimated that the Sound generated
more than $5.5 billion to the regional economy from clean
water-related activities alone - recreational and commercial
fishing and shellfishing, beach-going, and swimming. In
2008 dollars, that value is now $8.5 billion. The Sound
also generates uncounted billions through transportation,
ports, harbors, real estate, and other cultural and aesthetic
values. The Sound is breeding ground, nursery, feeding
ground, and habitat to more than 170 species of fish and
1,200 invertebrate species that are under increasing stress
from development and competing human uses.
The key environmental and ecological outcomes for Long
Island Sound include:
Marine waters that meet prescribed water quality
standards;
Diverse habitats that support healthy, abundant
and sustainable populations of diverse aquatic and
marine-dependent species; and
An ambient environment that is free of substances
that are potentially harmful to human health or
otherwise may adversely affect the food chain.
EPA continues to work with the States of New York and
Connecticut and other federal, state, and local Long Island
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
9
Sound Management Conference partners to implement
the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
(CCMP) to restore and protect the Sound. Because levels of
dissolved oxygen are critical to the health of aquatic life and
viable public use of the Sound, a CCMP priority is controlling
nitrogen discharges to meet water quality standards.
1.
The Long Island Sound bi-state nitrogen TMDL relies
on flexible and innovative approaches, notably "bubble"
management zones and exchange ratios that allow sewage
treatment plant operators to trade nitrogen reduction
obligations with each other. This approach can help
attain water quality improvement goals, while allowing
communities to save an estimated $800 million by allocating
reductions to those plants where they can be achieved most
economically, and plants that have the greatest impact on
water quality.
The States of New York and Connecticut will continue to
allocate resources toward Sewage Treatment Plant (STP)
upgrades to control nitrogen discharges as required in their
revised NPDES (SPDES) permits. The States will monitor
and report discharges through the Permit Compliance
System (PCS). Revisions to the TMDL conducted under
the initial review process will incorporate any revised marine
water quality standards for dissolved oxygen adopted by the
States of Connecticut and New York.
The State of Connecticut will continue its innovative
Nitrogen Credit Exchange program instituted in 2002.
Reductions in nitrogen discharges at plants that go beyond
TMDL requirements create the state's system of market
credits, which will continue to assist in reducing construction
costs and more effectively address nitrogen reductions to
the Sound. New York City will continue its STP nitrogen
upgrades under a 2005 State of New York Consent Order,
and will minimize the impact of nitrogen discharges to the
Sound as construction proceeds through 2014.
EPA will continue to work with the upper Long Island Sound
watershed States of Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
and Vermont to develop state plans to identify and control
nitrogen discharges to the Connecticut River, the primary
fresh water riverine input to the Sound. As sources are
identified and control strategies developed, state discharge
permits will need to be modified to incorporate appropriate
load allocations.
As nitrogen loads to the Sound decrease, reductions in the
size and duration of the hypoxic area may be anticipated.
While other factors also affect the timing, duration, and
severity of hypoxia, including weather conditions such
as rainfall, solar radiation and light, temperature, and
winds; continued reductions in nitrogen loads will help to
mitigate these uncontrollable factors. As the states continue
implementing STP upgrades, the new applied technologies
will reduce nitrogen inputs, limiting algal response and
interfering with the cycles that promote algal growth, death,
decay, and loss of dissolved oxygen.
to
EPA will continue to work with Management Conference
partners to restore degraded habitats and reopen rivers
and streams to diadromous fish passage. States and EPA
will direct efforts at the most vulnerable coastal habitats
and key areas for productivity. Projects, using a variety
of public and private funding sources, and in cooperation
with landowners, will construct fishways, remove dams, or
otherwise remove impediments to diadromous fish passage.
Where feasible and as funding allows, fish counting devices
will provide valuable data on actual numbers offish entering
breeding grounds. Restoration of the diadromous fishery
and increasing the higher trophic levels in the Sound are
longer-term goals of federal and state managers.
4.
To continue CCMP implementation, New York, Connecticut,
and EPA will implement the Long Island Sound 2008
Agreement. The Agreement builds upon CCMP goals
and targets, which were refined and documented in the
predecessor Long Island Sound 2003 Agreement. The
2008 Agreement was submitted for endorsement by the
Long Island Sound Policy Committee in 2008.
EPA and states will continue to participate in the Long Island
Sound Management Conference under CWA Section 320,
as implemented through the Long Island Sound Restoration
Act of 2000 as amended, CWA Section 119. The states
and EPA will continue to address the highest priority
environmental and ecological problems identified in the
CCMP - the impact of hypoxia on the ecosystem; the effects
of reducing toxic substances, pathogens, and floatable
debris; identification, restoration and protection of critical
habitats; and managing the populations of living marine and
marine-dependent resources that rely on the Sound as their
primary habitat. The Management Conference will work to
improve riparian buffers in key river reaches and restore
submerged aquatic vegetation in key embayments; reduce
the impact of toxic substances, pathogens, and floatable
debris on the ecology; and improve the stewardship of
these critical areas.
EPA and the states will continue to support the Citizens
Advisory Committee and the Science and Technical Advisory
Committee, which provide technical expertise and public
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
33
-------
participation and advice to the Management Conference
partners in the implementation of the CCMP. An educated
and informed public will more readily recognize problems
and understand their role in environmental stewardship.
5.
-4
The Long Island Sound Study (LISS) supports, and is
supported by EPA core environmental management and
regulatory control programs. The CCMP, established under
CWA Section 320, envisioned a partnership of federal, state
and local governments, private industry, academia and the
public, to cleanup and restore the Sound. This cooperative
environmental partnership relies on existing federal, state
and local regulatory frameworks - and funding- to achieve
targets for restoration and protection and apply limited
resources to highest priority areas.
EPA and the states use authorities under CWA Section 31 9
to manage watersheds that are critical to the health of Long
Island Sound. State and local TMDLs for harmful substances
support the work of the Management Conference in ensuring
a clean and safe Long Island Sound.
The Sound is an Estuary of National Significance, as so
recognized under CWA Section 320, and those funds help
support implementation of the CCMP. State Revolving
Funds under Section 601 are used to upgrade STPs for
nitrogen control, and NPDES permits issued under Section
402 provide enforceable targets to monitor progress in
reducing nitrogen and other harmful pollutants to waters
entering the Sound.
C) Grant Program Resources
EPA grant resources supporting this goal include the Long
Island Sound CCMP implementation grants authorized
under Section 119(d) of the Clean Water Act as amended.
These include the Long Island Sound Futures Fund Large
and Small grant programs administered by the National
Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Long Island Sound CCMP
Enhancements Grant program administered by the New
England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission,
and the Long Island Sound Research Grant program
administered by EPA. The LISS web page provides grant
information and progress toward meeting environmental
results at: (http://www.longislandsoundstudy.net/grants/
index.htm).
A) Subobjective
Protect and restore the South Florida ecosystem, including
the Everglades and coral reef ecosystems.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Program Strategies
The South Florida ecosystem encompasses three national
parks, more than ten national wildlife refuges, a national
preserve and a national marine sanctuary. It is home to
two Native American nations, and it supports the largest
wilderness area east of the Mississippi River, the only
living coral barrier reef adjacent to the United States, and
the largest commercial and sport fisheries in Florida. But
rapid population growth is threatening the health of this vital
ecosystem. South Florida is home to about 8 million people,
more than the populations of 39 individual states. Another 2
million people are expected to settle in the area overthe next
10 to 20 years. Fifty percent of the region's wetlands have
been lost to suburban and agricultural development, and
the altered hydrology and water management throughout
the region have had a major impact on the ecosystem.
EPA is working in partnership with numerous local, regional,
state, and federal agencies and tribes to ensure the long-
term sustainability of the region's varied natural resources
while providing for extensive agricultural operations and
a continually expanding population. EPA's South Florida
Geographic Initiative (SFGI) is designed to protect
and restore communities and ecosystems affected by
environmental problems. SFGI efforts include activities
related to the Section 404 wetlands protection program; the
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program (CERP);
the Water Quality Protection Program for the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary; the Southeast Florida Coral
Reef Initiative, directed by the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force;
the Brownfields Program; and a number of other waste
management programs.
1,
Strong execution of core clean waterprog rams is essential but
not adequate for accelerating progress toward maintaining
and restoring water quality and the associated biological
resources in South Florida. Water quality degradation is
often caused by many different and diffuse sources. To
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
address the complex causes of water quality impairment,
we are using an approach grounded in science, innovation,
stakeholder involvement, and adaptive management - the
watershed approach. In addition to implementing core
clean water programs, we will continue to work to:
Support and expand local watershed protection
efforts through innovative approaches to build
local capacity; and
Initiate or strengthen through direct support
watershed protection and restoration for critical
watersheds and water bodies.
2,
Responsibilities
The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS)
and Protection Act of 1990 directed EPA and the State
of Florida, in consultation with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to develop a Water
Quality Protection Program (WQPP) for the Sanctuary.
The purpose of the WQPP is to recommend priority
corrective actions and compliance schedules addressing
point and nonpoint sources of pollution in the Florida Keys
ecosystem. In addition, the Act also required development
of a comprehensive water quality monitoring program and
provision of opportunities for public participation. In FY
2009, EPA will continue to implement the WQPP for the
FKNMS, including the comprehensive monitoring projects
(coral reef, seagrass, and water quality), special studies,
data management, and public education and outreach
activities. EPA will also continue to support implementation
of wastewater and storm water master plans for the Florida
Keys to upgrade inadequate wastewater and storm water
infrastructure. In addition, we will continue to assist with
implementing the comprehensive plan for eliminating
sewage discharges from boats and other vessels.
s of the
In October 2002, the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force passed
a resolution to improve implementation of the National
Action Plan to Conserve Coral Reefs. Among other things,
the resolution recommended development of local action
strategies (LAS) to improve coordinated implementation of
coral reef conservation. In 2004 and 2005, EPA Region 4
staff worked with the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative
(SEFCRI) to develop a LAS for southeast Florida calling for
reducing "land-based sources of pollution" and increasing
the awareness and appreciation of coral habitat. Key goals
of the LAS are:
Characterize the existing condition of the coral reef
ecosystem;
Quantify, characterize and prioritize the land
based sources of pollution that need to be
addressed based on identified impacts to the
reefs;
Identify how pollution affects the southeast Florida
coral reef habitat;
Reduce the impacts of land-based sources of
pollution; and
Work in close cooperation with the awareness and
appreciation focus team.
Detailed action strategies or projects for each goal have been
developed. For example, one priority action strategy/project
is to assimilate existing data to quantify and characterize the
sources of pollution and identify the relative contributions of
point and nonpoint sources.
4,
for FY
/i/' ,< U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Support development of TMDLs for various south
Florida waters including the watershed forLakeOkeechobee,
the primary or secondary source of drinking water for large
portions of south Florida.
Assist the State of Florida and South Florida Water
Management District in evaluating the
appropriateness of aquifer storage and recovery
(ASR) technology as a key element of the overall
restoration strategy for south Florida. Region 4
will continue to work with the COE to evaluate
proposed ASR projects.
Continue implementation of the South Florida
Wetlands Conservation Strategy, including
protecting and restoring critical wetland habitats in
the face of tremendous growth and development.
Continue to work closely with the Jacksonville
District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the
State of Florida to facilitate expedited review of
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
regulatory permit actions associated with the
ongoing implementation of CERP. Several large
water storage impoundments will be under
construction during the next few years.
Continue to implement the Everglades Ecosystem
Assessment Program, an EMAP-based monitoring
program to assess the health of the Everglades
and the effectiveness of ongoing restoration and
regulatory strategies. Scientific publications will be
completed during FY2009.
Continue to work with the State of Florida and
federal agencies to implement appropriate
phosphorus control programs that will attain water
quality standards within the Everglades.
35
-------
C) Grant Program Resources
The South Florida Program Office uses available resources
to fund priority programs and projects that support the
restoration and maintenance of the south Florida ecosystem,
including the Everglades and coral reef habitat. These
programs and projects include monitoring (water quality,
seagrass, and coral reef), special studies, and public
education and outreach activities. Federal assistance
agreements for projects supporting the activities of the SFGI
are awarded under the authority of Section 104(b)(3) of the
CWA. Region 4 issues announcements of opportunity for
federal funding and "requests for proposals" in accordance
with EPA Order 5700.5 (Policy for Competition in Assistance
Agreements).
A) Subobjective
Improve water quality, improve air quality, and minimize
adverse impacts of rapid development in the Puget Sound
Basin.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Program Strategies
The Puget Sound Basin is the largest population and
commercial center in the Pacific Northwest, supporting a
vital system of international ports, transportation systems,
and defense installations. The ecosystem encompasses
roughly 20 rivers and 2,800 square miles of sheltered inland
waters that provide habitat to hundreds of species of marine
mammals, fish, and sea birds. Puget Sound salmon landings
average more than 19 million pounds per year and support
an average of 578,000 sport-fishing trips each year.
Although Puget Sound currently leads U.S. waterways in
shellfish production, 30,000 acres of shellfish beds have
been closed to harvest since 1980. These closures affect
local economies and cultural and subsistence needs for
these traditional resources. In addition, excess nutrients
have created hypoxic zones that further impair shellfish
and finfish populations. Recent monitoring assessments
indicate that marine species in the Puget Sound have
high levels of toxic contamination. Almost 5,700 acres
of submerged land (about 9 square miles) are currently
classified as contaminated with toxics and another 24,000
as at least partially contaminated. Additional pollutants
are still being released: approximately 1 million pounds of
toxics are released into the water and 5 million pounds into
the air each year, with many pollutants finding their way into
Puget Sound.
There is growing recognition that protecting the Puget
Sound ecosystem would require increased capacity and
sharper focus. In 2006, a broad partnership of civic leaders,
scientists, business and environmental representatives,
representative agency directors and tribal leadership was
asked to propose a new state approach to restoring and
protecting the Puget Sound. This challenge resulted in
the creation of the Puget Sound Partnership, a new state
agency, tasked with developing, by September 2008, an
updated and more integrated comprehensive management
plan, "2020 Action Agenda", for protecting and restoring the
Puget Sound ecosystem and its component habitats and
species.
Key program strategies for FY 2009 include:
Improving Local Water Quality and
Restoring Shellfish Beds
EPA will work with state and local agencies and
the tribes to help focus and maintain coordinated
corrective actions to improve water quality in areas
where shellfish bed closures or harvest area
downgrades are occurring.
Addressing Stormwater Issues through
Local Watershed Protection Plans
EPA will work with state and local agencies and
the tribes using local watershed protection
approaches to reduce stormwater impacts to local
aquatic resources, such as salmon and shellfish,
in urbanizing areas currently outside of NPDES
Phase I and II permit authority. Of particular
concern are the sensitive and high value estuarine
waters such as Hood Canal, the northern Straits,
and south Puget Sound.
Work with the state to increase support to local
and tribal governments and the development
community to promote smart growth and low
impact development approaches in the Puget
Sound region. Watershed focused projects will be
implemented with Targeted Watershed Grant funds
from FYs 2007 and 2008.
Water quality and habitat improvements will be
quantified, documented and evaluated as
local watershed protection and restoration plans
are implemented.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
EPA will help support development of a
comprehensive storm water monitoring program
for the Puget Sound basin so that information is
gathered that can be used to adaptively manage
the next round of permits and implementation
actions.
Reducing Sources of Toxics and Nutrients
Priority toxic contaminants from terrestrial,
atmospheric, and marine discharge sources will
be quantified and source control actions prioritized
and initiated.
A mass balance model of nutrient sources,
reservoirs, pathways, and risk to local ecosystems
in Puget Sound will be refined and specific nutrient
reduction strategies will be established within
priority areas, including both Hood Canal and
South Puget Sound.
Restoring and Protecting Nearshore Aquatic Habitats
Through the Puget Sound Nearshore Restoration
Partnership, high profile habitat restoration
projects will be initiated or others completed in
priority estuaries including the Skagit, Nisqually,
Hood Canal, South Puget Sound and areas along
the northern straits.
Protection programs, restoration strategies, project
lists, and outcomes will be evaluated against
current conditions and ongoing habitat loss to
determine net changes in extent and function of
estuary habitats.
Improving Ecosystem Monitoring and the
Application of Science
A new Integrated Science Plan for Puget Sound
will be developed including enhanced monitoring,
modeling, assessment and research capacity. The
emerging science agenda will be focused on
improving the effectiveness of both local
management activities and broader policy
initiatives.
A comprehensive watershed monitoring program
will be implemented to better understand the
impacts of stormwater runoff on aquatic resources
and the effectiveness of different management
practices and policies.
EPA will work with other science communication
initiatives and programs to ensure that data and
information is more available and relevant to
citizens, local jurisdictions, watershed
management forums, and resource managers.
C) Grant Program Resources
EPA grant resources directly supporting this goal have
usually been limited to the National Estuary Program Grants
under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act (approx. $500
K annually in recent years). The FY 2008 appropriations
bill included close to $20 million for development and
implementation of the 2020 Action Agenda for Puget Sound.
This will be funding an increased level of effort in FY 2009.
A range of other water program grants also support many
activities that assist in the achievement of this subobjective.
These include grants supporting Washington State and
Tribal water quality programs, infrastructure loan programs,
and competitive grants such as the Targeted Watershed
Grants.
ism
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
A) Subobjective
Prevent water pollution and improve and protect water
quality and ecosystems in the Columbia River Basin to
reduce risks to human health and the environment.
(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in
Appendices A and D.)
B) Key Program Strategies
More than 1,200 miles long, the Columbia River spans
portions of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada,
Utah, Montana, and a substantial portion of British
Columbia. The 260,000 square mile Columbia River
Basin comprises ecosystems that are home to a variety
of biologically significant plants and animals and supports
industries vital to the Pacific Northwest, including sport and
commercial fisheries, agriculture, transportation, recreation,
and electrical power generation.
Many Columbia River tributaries, the mainstem, and the
estuary are declared 'impaired' under Section 303(d) of the
Clean Water Act. EPA has a long historical commitment to
restoring the water quality and ecosystems in the Columbia
RiverBasin, focusing on publichealth and salmon restoration.
EPA studies, and other federal and state monitoring
programs, have found significant levels of toxins in fish
and the waters they inhabit, including dichloro-diphenyl-
trichloroethane (DDT), PCBs, and dieldrin. In 1994, EPA
funded the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission to
37
-------
,„,
IP
strategies to protect
large aquatic ecosystems
survey tribal members' fish consumption rates. This survey
found Columbia River tribal people eat significantly greater
amounts of fish than the general population. A follow-up
2002 EPA fish contaminant study found significant levels of
toxins in fish that tribal people eat.
EPA Region 10 is working closely with the States of Oregon,
Washington, Idaho, Columbia Basin tribal governments,
the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, local
governments, citizen groups, industry, and other federal
agencies to develop and implement a collaborative strategy
to assess and reduce toxics in fish and water in the Columbia
River Basin and to restore and protect habitat.
The Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, one of
EPAs National Estuary Programs, also plays a key role
in addressing toxics and restoration of critical wetlands in
the Lower Columbia River estuary. Since 1996, EPA has
provided significant financial support to the Lower Columbia
River Estuary Partnership (LCREP). LCREP developed a
management plan in 1999 that has served as a blueprint for
estuary recovery efforts. The Lower Columbia River and
estuary monitoring program, developed and overseen by
LCREP, is critical for better understanding the lower river
and estuary, including toxics and habitat characterization,
information that is essential for Columbia River salmon
restoration. EPA has also provided supplemental funding
to the LCREP program through EPAs Targeted Watershed
Grant program.
Working with state and local governments, EPA has
established several goals for improving environmental
conditions in the Columbia River basin by 2011:
Protect, enhance, or restore 13,000 acres of
wetland habitat and 3,000 acres of upland habitat
in the Lower Columbia River watershed;
Clean up 150 acres of known highly contaminated
sediments; and
Demonstrate a 10 percent reduction in mean
concentration of contaminants of concern found in
water and fish tissue.
Key activities in FY 2009 to accomplish these goals
include:
Toxics Reduction
Continue contaminated sediment removals under
Superfund & state RCRA activities including
Portland Harbor & Bradford Island.
Implement existing and legacy pesticide
reductions, including pesticide stewardship
partnerships; targeted pesticide/toxics collections;
and precision agriculture.
Implement TMDLs which address sediment
load reductions, including Washington State TMDL
implementation in the Okanogan, Yakima,
Walla Walla, Wenatchee, Spokane, and
Similkameen tributaries.
Other key activities will include ongoing Superfund
investigation work at the Hanford Nuclear
Reservation and Lake Roosevelt.
Habitat
Continue restoration of wetland & upland habitat
areas through LCREP.
Monitoring
Systematically expand key monitoring activities in
fish, water, and sediment.
Through the Lower Columbia NEP, identify
contaminants of concern; identify data bases that
can provide baseline data, establish new
monitoring efforts to fill data gaps; and identify and
implement management practices to reduce
contaminants of concern.
Build on the monitoring work done in the Lower
Columbia River to develop and implement,
collaboratively with other partners, a long-term
monitoring effort above Bonneville Dam for fish,
water and sediment, to further understand and
characterize toxics in the river.
Reporting
A "State of the Columbia River Report," is
scheduled to be released in late 2008 to assess
and characterize toxics in the Columbia River.
C) Grant Program Resources
EPA grant resources directly supporting this goal are limited
to the National Estuary Program Grants under Section
320 of the Clean Water Act (approx. $500 K annually in
recent years) which funds work only in the lower part of the
Columbia River, less than 1/5th of the Columbia River Basin.
A range of other water program grants also support many
activities that assist in the achievement of this subobjective.
These include grants supporting Oregon and Washington
State and Tribal water quality programs, nonpoint source
programs, infrastructure loan programs, and competitive
grants such as the Regional Geographic Initiative grants.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
4>P ^EF
This National Water Program Guidance document describes
the general approaches that EPA, in consultation with states
and tribes, expects to be most effective in attaining the
environmental and public health improvements identified in
the EPA2006-2011 Strategic Plan. This Guidance, however,
is part of a larger, three part management process.
1: Complete National Water Program Guidance:
During the fall of 2007, EPA reviewed program measures
and aligned the number of measures. Draft Guidance
was published in February 2008 and comments were due
on March 31st. EPA reviewed the comments and made
changes and clarifications to the measures and the text of
the Guidance. A summary of comments and responses to
comments are provided on the Office of Water Strategic
Plan Web site at (http://www.epa.gov/waterAwaterplany).
EPA regional offices also provided regional targets in late
March. After discussions among headquarters and regional
offices, national targets for FY 2009 were revised to reflect
regional input.
: EPA Region/State/Tribe Consultation/Planning:
EPA Regions will work with states and tribes to develop
FY 2009 Performance Partnership Agreements or other
grant workplans, including commitments to reporting key
activities and, in some cases, commitments to specific FY
2009 program accomplishments (April through October of
2008).
; Program Evaluation and Adaptive Management:
The National Water Program will evaluate program progress
in 2009 and adapt water program management and priorities
based on this assessment information (FY2009).
EPA is working with states to reduce reporting burden.
An online attachment to this Guidance, Reporting Burden
Reduction Opportunities for States, shows states'
recommendations that EPA has adopted partially or in
full. To ensure national consistency, implementation of
these burden reduction opportunities across the regions is
encouraged to the greatest extent possible. The balance of
the recommendations is in the process of being evaluated
in order to make final implementation decisions. This
attachment is posted with this Guidance on the Internet at
(http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/).
Parts 2 and 3 of this program management system are
discussed below. Key aspects of water program grant
management are also addressed.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
A) EPA Region/State/Tribe
Consultation/Planning (Step 2)
EPAregional offices will workwith states and tribes beginning
in April of 2008 to develop agreements concerning program
priorities and commitments for FY 2009 in the form of
Performance Partnership Agreements or individual grant
workplans. The National Water Program Guidance for FY
2009, including program strategies and FY 2009 targets,
forms a foundation for this effort.
The National Water Program Guidance for FY 2009
includes a minimum number of measures that address the
critical program activities that are expected to contribute to
attainment of long-term goals. Between FYs 2007 and 2008,
the total number of water measures has been reduced and
EPA has focused reporting on existing data systems where
possible. Some of these Program Activity Measures track
activities carried out by EPA while others address activities
carried out by states and tribes (see Appendices A and D).
In addition, some of these measures include annual national
"targets" while others are intended to simply indicate change
overtime.
During the Spring/Summer of 2008, EPA regions will work
with states and tribes to agree on reporting for all the
measures in the FY2009 Guidance, including both target and
indicator measures. For the target measures, EPA regional
offices will develop FY 2009 regional "commitments" based
on their discussions with states and tribes and using the
"targets" in the FY 2009 Guidance as a point of reference.
Draft regional "commitments" are due July 7 and, after
review and comment by National Program Managers, EPA
regions are to finalize regional commitments by September
19. These final regional "commitments" are then summed
to make the national commitment, and both the regional
and national commitments are entered into the Agency's
Annual Commitment System (ACS) prior to the October 1st
start of FY 2009.
A key part of this process is discussion among EPA
regions, states, and tribes of regional "commitments"
and the development of binding performance partnership
agreements or other grant workplan documents that
establish reporting and performance agreements. The goal
of this joint effort is to allocate available resources to those
program activities that are likely to result in the best progress
toward accomplishing water quality and public health goals
for that stateytribe (e.g., improved compliance with drinking
water standards and improved water quality on a watershed
basis). This process is intended to provide the flexibility
for EPA regions to adjust their commitments based on
relative needs, priorities, and resources of states and tribes
in the EPA region. Recognizing that rural communities
face significant challenges in ensuring safe drinking water
and protecting water quality, the National Water Program
39
-------
will focus on addressing rural communities' needs in
discussions with states and work more collaboratively with
rural communities and rural technical providers in 2008
in planning program activities for FY 2009. The tailored
program "commitments" that result from this process
define, in an operational sense, the "strategy" for the
National Water Program for FY 2009.
As EPAregional offices work with states and tribesto develop
FY 2009 commitments, there should also be discussion of
initial expectations for progress under key measures in FY
2010. The Agency begins developing the FY 2010 budget in
the spring of 2008 and is required to provide initial estimates
of FY 2010 progress for measures included in the budget in
August of 2008. These estimates can be adjusted during
the fall before they go into the final FY 2010 President's
budget in January 2009. The Office of Water will consult
with EPA regions in developing the initial FY 2010 budget
measure targets in August 2008, and regions will be better
able to comment on proposed initial targets if they have had
preliminary discussions of FY 2010 progress with states
and tribes. Regions should assume stable funding for the
purposes of these discussions.
For a subset of the measures for which FY 2009 targets
and commitments are established, EPA is asking that states
and EPA regions provide National Program Managers with
state specific results data at the end of FY 2009. These
measures, referred to as "State Grant" measures are
associated with some of the larger water program grants.
EPA has been directed by the Office of Management and
Budget to identify key measures related to key state grant
programs. The grant programs and the FY 2009 "State
Grant" measures supporting the grant are:
1) Water Pollution Control State and Interstate
Program Support (106 Grants). FY 2009 State
Grant Measures: SP-10; WQ-1a/b; WQ-3a; WQ-5;
WQ-8b; WQ-12a; WQ-13a/b/c/d; WQ-14a; WQ
15a; WQ-19a; WQ-20; and SS-1.
2) Public Water System Supervision (PWSS
Grants). FY 2009 State Grant Measures: 2.1.1;
SP-1;SP-4a/b;andSDW-1a.
3) State Underground Water Source Protection
(UIC Grants). FY 2009 Measures: SDW-6 and
SOW 7a/b/c.
4) Beach Monitoring and Notification Program
Implementation Grants. FY 2009 Measures:
SP-9 and SS-2.
5) Nonpoint Source Grants (319 Grants). FY 2009
Measure: WQ-10.
For these grants, states will need to provide end of year
results data for FY 2009 on a state-specific basis for
identified measures.
EPA, states, territories, and tribes are working together to
develop the National Environmental Information Exchange
Network, a secure, Internet- and standards-based way to
support electronic data reporting, sharing, and integration
of both regulatory and non-regulatory environmental data.
Where data exchange using the Exchange Network is
available, states, tribes and territories exchanging data with
each other or with EPA should make the Exchange Network
and EPA's connection to it, the Central Data Exchange
(CDX), the standard way they exchange data and should
phase out any legacy methods they have been using. More
information on the Exchange Network is available at (www.
excl
.net).
In addition to this National Water Program Guidance,
supporting technical guidance is available in grant-specific
guidance documents. The grant guidance documents will
be available by April 2008 in most cases. For most grants,
guidance for FY 2008 is being carried forward unchanged
to FY 2009. Grant guidance documents can be found
on the Internet at
More information about grant management and reporting
requirements is provided at the end of this section.
B) Program Evaluation and Adaptive
Management (Step 3)
As the strategies and programs described in this Guidance
are implemented during FY2009, EPA, states, and tribes will
evaluate progress toward water goals and work to improve
program performance by refining strategic approaches or
adjusting program emphases.
The National Water Program will evaluate progress using
four key tools:
1.
The Office of Water will prepare a performance report for
the National Water Program at the mid-point in each fiscal
year and the end of each fiscal year based on data provided
by EPA headquarters program offices, EPA regions, states,
and tribes. These reports will give program managers an
integrated analysis of:
Progress at the national level with respect to
program activities and expected environmental
and public health goals identified in the Strategic
Plan and Regional plans;
Progress in each EPA region with respect to the
Strategic Plan, program activity measures, and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency _ ;'~y j'
-------
-------
workforce plans.
4) Promote Wide Dissemination of Best Practices:
The Office of Water will actively promote the wide application
of best practices and related program management
innovations identified as part of program assessments.
5) Expand Regional Office Participation in Program
Assessment: The Office of Water will promote expanded
involvement of EPA regional offices in program assessments
and implementation of the assessment process. This effort
will include expanded participation of the Lead Region in
program assessment processes.
6) Strengthen Program Performance Assessment
in Personnel Evaluations: The Office of Water will include
in EPA staff performance standards specific references
that link the evaluation of staff, especially the Senior
Executive Service Corps, to success in improving program
performance.
7) Recognize Successes: In cases where program
performance assessments have contributed to improved
performance in environmental or program activity terms,
the Office of Water will recognize these successes. By
explaining and promoting cases of improved program
performance, the organization builds confidence in the
assessment process and reinforces the concept that
improvements are attainable.
8) Strengthen Development of Future Strategic
Plans: The Office of Water will use program assessments
to improve future strategic plans and program measures.
9) Promote Effective Grants Management: The
Office of Water will continue to actively promote effective
grants management to improve program performance. The
Agency has issued directives, policies, and guidance to help
improve grants management. It is the policy of the Office
of Water that all grants are to comply with applicable grants
requirements (described in greater detail in the "National
Water Program Grants Management for FY 2009" section),
regardless of whether the program specific guidance
document addresses the requirement.
The Office of Water places a high priority on effective grants
management. The key areas to be emphasized as grant
programs are implemented are:
Promoting competition to the maximum extent
practicable;
Monitoring assistance agreements and ensuring
compliance with post-award management
standards;
Assuring that project officers and their supervisors
adequately address grants management
responsibilities; and
Linking grants performance to the achievement of
environmental results as laid out in the Agency's
Strategic Plan and this National Water Program
Guidance.
1, for of
The Office of Water strongly supports the Agency policy to
promote competition to the maximum extent practicable in
the award of assistance agreements. Project officers must
comply with Agency policy concerning competition in the
award of grants and cooperative agreements and ensure
that the competitive process is fair and impartial, that all
applicants are evaluated only on the criteria stated in the
announcement, and that no applicant receives an unfair
advantage.
The Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements, EPA
Order 5700.5A1, effective January 15, 2005, applies to
competitive announcements issued, released, or posted
after January 14,2005; assistance agreement competitions,
awards, and disputes based on competitive announcements
issued, released, or posted after January 14, 2005; non-
competitive awards resulting from non-competitive funding
recommendations submitted to a Grants Management
Office after January 14, 2005; and assistance agreement
amendments issued after January 14, 2005.
If program offices and regional offices choose to conduct
competitions for awards under programs that are exempt
from the Competition Order, they must comply with the
Order and any applicable guidance issued by the Grants
Competition Advocate (GCA). This includes complying with
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) standard
formatting requirements for federal agency announcements
of funding opportunities.
As of October 1,2006, per OMB Directive, all federal agency
funding opportunity announcements for open competitions
must provide applicants with the opportunity to submit
applications electronically through (http://www.grants.
gov). It is the official federal government website where
applicants can find and apply to funding opportunities from
all 26 federal grant-making agencies.
On December 1, 2006 the Office of Grants and Debarment
issued a memorandum describing the approval process
for using State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) funds
to make non-competitive awards to state co-regulator
organizations using the co-regulator exception in the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Competition Order. The memorandum states that it is EPA
policy to ensure that the head of the affected state agency
ordepartment (e.g., the State Environmental Commissioner
orthe head of the state public health or agricultural agency)
is involved in this approval process. Accordingly, effective
December 1, 2006, before redirecting STAG funds from
a State Continuing Environmental Program (CEP) grant
allotment for a non-competitive award to a state co-regulator
organization, EPA must request and obtain the consent of
the head of the affected state agency ordepartment.
2,
on
The Office of Water is required to develop and carry out a
post-award monitoring plan and conduct baseline monitoring
for every award. EPA Order 5700.6 A. 2 CHG 2, Policy on
Compliance, Review and Monitoring, effective January
1 , 2008 helps to ensure effective post-award oversight
of recipient performance and management. The Order
encompasses both the administrative and programmatic
aspects of the Agency's financial assistance programs.
From the programmatic standpoint, this monitoring should
ensure satisfaction of five core areas:
Compliance with all programmatic terms and
conditions;
Correlation of the recipient's work plan/application
and actual progress under the award;
Availability of funds to complete the project;
Proper management of and accounting for
equipment purchased under the award; and
Compliance with all statutory and regulatory
requirements of the program.
If during monitoring it is determined that there is reason to
believe that the grantee has committed or commits fraud,
waste and/or abuse, then the project officer must contact
the Office of the Inspector General. Advanced monitoring
activities must be documented in the official grant file and
the Grantee Compliance Database. Baseline monitoring
activities must be documented in the Post-Award Database
in the Integrated Grants Management System (IGMS).
3, for
Project officers of assistance agreements participate
in a wide range of pre-and post-award activities. OGD
issued Guidance for Addressing Grants Management and
the Management of Interagency Agreements under the
Performance Appraisal and Recognition System (PARS) on
January 17, 2008 to be used for 2008 PARS performance
agreements/appraisals of project officers who are managing
at least one active grant during the rating period and their
supervisors/managers. The Office of Water supports the
requirement that project officers and their supervisors/
y < U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
managers address grants management responsibilities
through the Agency's PARS process.
4,
EPA Order 5700.7, which went into effect in 2005, states
that it is EPA policy to:
Link proposed assistance agreements to the
Agency's Strategic Plan;
Ensure that outputs and outcomes are
appropriately addressed in assistance agreement
competitive funding announcements, work plans,
and performance reports; and
Consider how the results from completed
assistance agreement projects contribute to the
Agency's programmatic goals and responsibilities.
The Order applies to all non-competitive funding
packages/funding recommendations submitted to Grants
Management Offices after January 1, 2005, all competitive
assistance agreements resulting from competitive funding
announcements issued after January 1, 2005, and
competitive funding announcements issued after January
1, 2005. Project officers must include in the Funding
Recommendation a description of how the project fits within
the Agency's Strategic Plan. The description must identify
all applicable EPA strategic goal(s), objectives, and where
available, subobjective(s), consistent with the appropriate
Program Results Code(s).
In addition, project officers must:
Consider how the results from completed
assistance agreement projects contribute to the
Agency's programmatic goals and objectives;
Ensure that well-defined outputs and outcomes
are appropriately addressed in assistance
agreement work plans, solicitations, and
performance reports; and
Certify/assure that they have reviewed the
assistance agreement work plan and that the work
plan contains outputs and outcomes.
-------
In 2001, the EPA Environmental Justice Executive
Steering Committee (comprised of the Deputy Assistant
Administrators and Deputy Regional Administrators) directed
each headquarters program office and EPA regional office to
develop Environmental Justice (EJ) Action Plans. In 2005,
EPA identified eight (8) specific national environmental
justice priorities as critical issues of nation-wide concern
and addressed in the Agency's FY 2006 - 2011 Strategic
Plan.
The EJ Action Plans are prospective planning tools
that identify measurable commitments to address key
environmental justice priorities. EPA is currently working
to align the development of the EJ Action Plans with the
development of the NPM Guidances. The development or
identification of activities for the EJ Action Plans is occurring
concurrently with the development of the priorities and
strategies of the National Program Manager Guidances.
in the
The Office of Water places emphasis on achieving results
in areas with potential environmental justice concerns
through Water Safe to Drink (Sub-objective 2.1.1) and Fish
and Shellfish Safe to Eat (Sub-objective 2.1.2), two of the
eight national EJ priorities. In addition, the National Water
Program places emphasis on other EJ Water Related
Elements: 1) Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border
Environmental Health (Subobjective 4.2.4); 2) Sustain and
Restore Pacific Island Territories (Subobjective 4.2.5); and
Alaska Native Villages Program. This focus will result in
improved environmental quality for all people, especially for
those living in areas with potential disproportionately high
and adverse human health conditions. In order to advance
environmental quality for communities with EJ concerns,
the Office of Water will address the EJ considerations in
infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged
communities and reducing risk to exposure in contaminants
in fish.
to
The Office of Waterwill promote infrastructure improvements
to small and disadvantaged communities through the
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) that reduce
public exposure to contaminants through compliance with
rules and supports the reliable delivery of safe water in
small and disadvantaged communities, Tribal and territorial
public water systems, schools, and child-care centers.
To support better management of water systems on tribal
lands, EPA will implement a Tribal operator certification
program to provide Tribal water utility staff with drinking
water operator certification opportunities. EPA will work
with its federal partners to improve access to safe drinking
water for persons living on tribal lands.
To maintain and improve water quality in rural America, EPA
will continue its efforts to promote better management of
water utilities through support of state capacity development
and operator certification programs, and through initiatives
on asset management, operator recruitment and retention,
and water efficiency.
EPA will continue to encourage states to refer drinking
water systems to third party assistance providers, when
needed. Third party assistance is provided through existing
contractual agreements or by other state, federal, or non-
profit entities.
On October 10, 2007, EPA published the latest changes to
the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) which included significant
improvements to the Public Education (PE) requirements.
Drinking water systems must conduct PE when they have
a lead action level exceedance. EPA made significant
modifications to the content of the written public education
materials (message content) and added a new set of
delivery requirements. These revisions are intended to
better ensure that at risk and under represented populations
receive information quickly and are able to act to reduce
their exposure.
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
includes a provision which provides new authority for EPA,
in consultation with other federal agencies, to conduct a
range of activities to promote healthy school environments.
The Act requires EPA, in consultation with DoEd, DHHS,
and other relevant agencies, to issue voluntary guidelines
for states to use in developing and implementing an
environmental health program for schools. The guidelines
are to encompass a broad range of specific issues including
lead in drinking water.
to Eat
EJ Consideration: Fish Consumption Monitoring and
Advisories - Reducing Risk to Exposure in Contaminants
in Fish.
The Office of Water promotes contaminant monitoring, as
well as risk communication to minority populations who
may consume large amounts of fish and shellfish taken
from polluted waters. Integration of public health advisory
activities into the Water Quality Standards Program
promotes environmental justice by allowing that advisories
and minority population health risks are known when
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
states make water quality standards attainment decisions,
developing Total Maximum Daily Loads for impaired waters,
and developing permits to control sources of pollution.
The Office of Water will focus on activities encouraging
states to assess fish and shellfish tissue contaminant
information in waters used for fishing by minority populations
and tribes, particularly those that catch fish for subsistence.
Such populations may include women of child bearing
age, children, African Americans, Asian Pacific Islanders,
Hispanics, Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska
Natives.
In orderto begin documenting the environmental and human
health improvements achieved in areas with potential
environmental justice concerns, the Office of Water will
begin developing specific performance measures for
activities identified in its EJ Action Plan. These performance
measures will assist managers on how to better integrate
environmental justice principles into policies, programs, and
activities.
The Office of Water reaches these populations by
disseminating information in multiple languages to doctors,
nurses, nurse practitioners, and midwives about reducing
the risks of exposure to contaminants in fish and shellfish.
The Office of Water maintains the National Fish Advisory
Website that includes the National Listing of Fish Advisories
(includes both fish and shellfish advisories) and provides
information to health professionals and the public on health
advice for eating fish and shellfish, and how to prepare fish
caught for recreation and subsistence.
EPA will continue to work with unserved and underserved
communities in the U.S.-Mexico Border region and Pacific
Islands to improve water infrastructure to increase access
to safe drinking water and sanitation.
The Office of Water will promote the protection of public
health through the improvement of sanitation conditions in
Alaska Native Villages and other small and disadvantaged
rural Alaska communities. EPA's Alaska Native Village
Infrastructure program funds the development and
construction of drinking water and wastewater infrastructure.
As projects are completed, public exposure to contaminants
is greatly reduced through the reliable delivery of safe
drinking water in compliance with public health standards
and the treatment of wastewater to meet environmental
regulations.
in the
The Office of Water will track these activities through the
EJ Action Plan, Goal 2 Clean and Safe Water, Subobjective
2.1.1 (Water Safe to Drink) and Subobjective 2.1.2 (Fish and
Shellfish Safe to Eat). For the EJ water related elements,
the Office of Water will track activities through the EJ
Action Plan, Subobjective 4.2.4 (Sustain and Restore the
U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health), Subobjective
4.2.5 (Sustain and Restore Pacific Island Territories), and
performance measures from the budget and PART review
of the Alaska Native Villages Program.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
-------
" I
of
Fiscal Year 2009
I '
A) Summary Table:
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measures Appendix
B) FY 2009 Water State Grant Measures Appendix
C) Explanation of Key Changes from FY 2008 to FY 2009
D) Detailed Measures Appendix:
Measures with National and Regional Data and Targets
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
47
-------
Appendix A
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measures Appendix
Fiscal Year 2009
X. «*** . /
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
ACS
Code
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
HQ
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
Sub-objective 2.1.1: Water safe to drink
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
SP-1
SP-2
SP-3
SP-4a
SP-4b
SP-5
SDW-la
SDW-lb
Percent of the population served by community water
systems that receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards
through approaches including effective treatment and
source water protection.
Percent of community water systems that meet all
applicable health-based standards through approaches
that include effective treatment and source water
protection.
Percent of "person months" (i.e. all persons served by
community water systems times 12 months) during
which community water systems provide drinking
water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards.
Percent of the population in Indian country served by
community water systems that receive drinking water
that meets all applicable health-based drinking water
standards .
Percent of community water systems where risk to
public health is minimized through source water
protection.
Percent of the population served by community water
systems where risk to public health is minimized
through source water protection.
Number of homes on tribal lands lacking access to
safe drinking water.
Percent of community water systems (CWSs) that
have undergone a sanitary survey within the past three
years (five years for outstanding performers) as
required under the Interim Enhanced and Long-Term ]
Surface Water Treatment Rules.
Number of tribal community water systems (CWSs)
that have undergone a sanitary survey within the past
three years (five years for outstanding performers) as
required under the Interim Enhanced and Long-Term ]
Surface Water Treatment Rules.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
89%
88%
95%
82%
35%
45%
28,977
93%
52
89%
82%
94.5%
93%
57%
81%
90%
1
75%
86%
90%
90%
60%
78%
95%
2
90%
90%
96%
n/a
23%
55%
91%
n/a
91%
89%
94%
89%
46%
51%
94%
1
91%
88%
95%
95%
39%
63%
84%
2
89%
87%
95%
82%
30%
46%
93%
7
92%
87%
95%
72%
18%
20%
95%
1
90%
90%
95%
87%
38%
32%
90%
12
95%
90%
98%
75%
1%
1%
100%
18
90%
89%
95%
87%
35%
72%
95%
8
28,977
Page 1 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
ACS
Code
SDW-2
SDW-3
SDW-4
SDW-5
SDW-6
SDW-7a
SDW-7b
SDW-7c
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Percent of the data for violations of health-bas ed
standards at public water systems that is accurate and
complete in SDWIS-FED for all maximum
contaminant level and treatment technique rules
(excluding the Lead and Copper Rule).
Percent of the Lead action level data for the Lead and
Copper Rule, for community water systems serving
over 3,300 people, that is complete in SDWIS-FED.
Fund utilization rate [cumulative dollar amount of
loan agreements divided by cumulative funds
available for projects] for the Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF).
Number of Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
(DWSRF) projects that have initiated operations.
Percent of identified Class V Motor Vehicle Waste
Disposal wells that are closed or permitted.
(cumulative)
Percent of deep injection wells that are used to inject
industrial, municipal, or hazardous waste (Class I) that
lose mechanical integrity and are returned to
compliance within 180 days thereby reducing the
potential to endanger underground sources of drinking
water.
Percent of deep injection wells that are used to
enhance oil recovery or that are used for the disposal
or storage of other oil production related activities
(Class II) that lose mechanical integrity and are
returned to compliance within 180 days thereby
reducing the potential to endanger underground
sources of drinking water.1
Percent of deep injection wells that are used for salt
solution mining (Class III) that lose mechanical
integrity and are returned to compliance within 180
days thereby reducing the potential to endanger
underground sources of drinking water.1
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
FY 2009
National
Target
n/a
n/a
87%
3,968
70%
89%
87%
91%
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
82%
455
80%
n/a
n/a
n/a
02
91%
395
75%
n/a
90%
90%
03
89%
415
75%
n/a
98%
100%
04
89%
501
73%
90%
70%
100%
05
85%
875
65%
75%
65%
75%
06
79%
162
80%
90%
90%
90%
07
93%
344
90%
95%
90%
95%
08
88%
380
85%
95%
90%
95%
09
82%
201
75%
90%
90%
90%
10
94%
240
20%
75%
85%
n/a
HQ
Page 2 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.1.1
2.1.1
211
211
Subob
212
2.1.2
2.1.2
2.1.2
ACS
Code
SDW-8
SDW-9
SDW-
lOa
SDW-
lOb
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Percent of high priority Class V wells identified in
sensitive ground water protection areas that are closed
or permitted, (cumulative)
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and
report results in both % and #.1
Percent of community water system intakes for which
source water was assessed for drinking water use
during the most recent reporting cycle.
Percent of waterbody impairments identified by States
in 2002, in which there is a community water system
intake and the impairment cause is for either a
drinking water use or a pollutant that is regulated as a
drinking water contaminant, for which there is a
TMDL.
Percent of waterbody impairments identified by States
in 2002, in which there is a community water system
intake and the impairment cause is for either a
drinking water use or a pollutant that is regulated as a
drinking water contaminant, for which the waterbody
impairments have been restored.
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
86%
n/a
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
99.8%
(12,075)
02
86%
03
88%
(2,900)
04
95%
(123)
05
50%
(118)
06
2
(86%)
07
95%
(354)
08
70%
09
40%
(2,042)
10
20%
(50)
HQ
ective 2.1.2 Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
SP-6
SP-7
FS-la
FS-lb
Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury
levels in blood above the level of concern.
Percent of state-monitored shellfish growing acres
impacted by anthropogenic sources that are approved
or conditionally approved for use.
Percent of river miles where fish tissue will be
assessed to support waterbody-specific or regional
consumption advisories or a determination that no
consumption advice is necessary. (Great Lakes
measured separately; AK not included.)
Percent of lake acres where fish tissue will be
assessed to support waterbody-specific or regional
consumption advisories or a determination that no
consumption advice is necessary. (Great Lakes
measured separately; AK not included.)
Y
Y
5 20%
65 to 85%
n/a
n/a
5 20%
65 to
85%
Subobjective 2.1.3 Water Safe for Swimming
Page 3 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.1.3
2.1.3
2.1.3
2.1.3
Subobj
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
ACS
Code
SP-8
SP-9
SS-1
SS-2
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Number of waterbome disease outbreaks attributable
to swimming in or other recreational contact with
coastal and Great Lakes waters, measured as a 5-year
average.
Percent of days of the beach season that coastal and
Great Lakes beaches monitored by state beach safety
programs are open and safe for swimming.
Number and national percent, using a constant
denominator, of Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO)
permits with a schedule incorporated into an
appropriate enforceable mechanism, including a
permit or enforcement order, with specific dates and
milestones, including a completion date consistent
with Agency guidance, which requires : 1 )
Implementation of a Long Term Control Plan (LTCP)
which will result in compliance with the technology
and water quality-based requirements of the Clean
Water Act; or 2) implementation of any other
acceptable CSO control measures consistent with the
1994 CSO Control Policy; or 3) completion of
separation after the baseline date, (cumulative)
Percent of all Tier I (significant) public beaches that
are monitored and managed under the BEACH Act
program.
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
FY 2009
National
Target
2
91%
668
(78%)
99%
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
98%
76
(93%)
100%
02
96%
69
(65%)
100%
03
95%
197
(83%)
100%
04
92%
15
(63%)
100%
05
85%
272
(75%)
100%
06
82%
n/ci
95%
07
n/a
20
(83%)
n/a
08
n/a
1
(100%)
n/a
09
86.6%
3
(100%)
100%
10
93%
15
(100%)
93%
HQ
2
ective 2.2.1 Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
SP-10
SP-11
SP-12
SP-13
Number of waterbodies identified in 2002 as not
attaining water quality standards where standards are
now fully attained, (cumulative^
Remove the specific causes of waterbody impairment
identified by states in 2002. (cumulative)
Improve water quality conditions in impaired
watersheds nationwide using the watershed approach.
(cumulative)
Ensure that the condition of the Nation's wadeable
streams does not degrade (i.e., there is no statistically
significant increase in the percent of streams rated
"poor" and no statistically significant decrease in the
streams rated "good").
Y
1,768
5,133
62
n/a
(not
reporting
until 2012)
76
132
4
84
230
8
370
1200
7
360
863
16
309
1700
5
135
300
5
230
245
2
96
163
13
56
214
0
52
86
2
Page 4 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
221
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
ACS
Code
SP-14
SP-15
WQ-la
WQ-lb
WQ-2
WQ-3a
WQ-3b
WQ-4a
WQ-4b
WQ-5
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Improve water quality in Indian country at monitoring
stations in tribal waters (i.e., show improvement in
one or more of seven key parameters: dissolved
oxygen, pH, water temperature, total nitrogen, total
phosphorus, pathogen indicators, and turbidity).
(cumulative)
By 2015, in coordination with other federal agencies,
reduce by 50 percent the number of homes on tribal
lands lacking access to basic sanitation, (cumulative)
Number of States and Territories that have adopted
EPA approved nutrient criteria into their water quality
standards, (cumulative)
Number of States and Territories that are on schedule
with a mutually agreed-upon plan to adopt nutrient
criteria into their water quality standards, (annual)
Number of Tribes that have water quality standards
approved by EPA. (cumulative^
Number, and national percent, of States and
Territories that within the preceding three year period,
submitted new or revised water quality criteria
acceptable to EPA that reflect new scientific
information from EPA or other resources not
considered in the previous standards.
Number, and national percent of Tribes that within the
preceding three year period, submitted new or revised
water quality criteria acceptable to EPA that reflect
new scientific information from EPA or other
resources not considered in the previous standards.
Percentage of submissions of new or revised water
quality standards from States and Territories that are
approved by EPA.
Percentage of submissions of new or revised water
quality standards from authorized Tribes that are
approved by EPA.
Number of States and Territories that have adopted
and are implementing their monitoring strategies in
keeping with established schedules.
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
FY 2009
National
Target
n/a
(not
reporting
until 2012)
20 101
12
35
35
34
(60.7%)
15
(48%)
76.2%
66.8%
56
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
3
3
n/a
2
n/a
75%
n/a
6
02
0
4
1
1
83%
n/a
4
03
1
5
n/a
4
n/a
83%
n/a
6
04
2
7
2
6
2
87%
n/a
8
05
0
5
4
5
1
80%
80%
6
06
1
4
10
4
3
75%
75%
5
07
1
3
n/a
3
n/a
75%
n/a
4
08
0
3
3
5
3
79%
79%
6
09
4
1
5
2
75%
50%
7
10
0
0
10
1
3
50%
50%
4
HQ
20 101
Page 5 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
ACS
Code
WQ-6a
WQ-6b
WQ-7
WQ-8a
WQ-8b
WQ-9a
WQ-9b
WQ-9c
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Number of Tribes that currently receive funding undei
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act that have
developed and begun implementing monitoring
strategies that are appropriate to their water quality
program consistent with EPA Guidance, (cumulative)
Number of Tribes that are providing water quality
data in a format accessible for storage in EPA's data
system, (cumulative)
Number of States and Territories that provide
electronic information using the Assessment Database
version 2 or later (or compatible system) and geo-
reference the information to facilitate the integrated
reporting of assessment data, (cumulative)
Number, and national percent, of TMDLs that are
established or approved by EPA [Total TMDLs] on a
schedule consistent with national policy.
Note: A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing
pollutants in order to attain water quality standards.
The terms 'approved' and 'established' refer to the
completion and approval of the TMDL itself.
Number, and national percent, of approved TMDLs,
that are established by States and approved by EPA
[State TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with national
policy.
Note: A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing
pollutants in order to attain water quality standards.
The terms 'approved' and 'established' refer to the
completion and approval of the TMDL itself.
Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of
nitrogen from nonpoint sources to waterbodies
(Section 319 funded projects only).
Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of
phosphorus from nonpoint sources to waterbodies
(Section 319 funded projects only).
Estimated annual reduction in million tons of
sediment from nonpoint sources to waterbodies
(Section 319 funded projects only).
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
FY 2009
National
Target
135
78
42
3,176
(82%)
3,085
(81%)
8.5 million
Ibs
4.5 million
Ibs
700,000
tons
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
6
6
6
230
230
02
0
1
4
89
89
03
n/a
n/a
6
1,035
1,035
04
1
1
5
433
393
05
28
18
5
445
445
06
14
7
2
222
178
07
3
1
2
161
161
08
15
15
6
230
230
09
35
15
4
45
43
10
33
14
2
286
281
HQ
8.5
million
Ibs
4.5
million
Ibs
700,000
tons
Page 6 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.2.1
221
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
221
221
2.2.1
2.2.1
221
ACS
Code
WQ-10
WQ-11
WQ-13a
WQ-13b
WQ-13c
WQ-13d
WO 14a
WQ-14b
WQ-15a
WQ-15b
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Number of waterbodies identified by States (in
1998/2000 or subsequent years) as being primarily
nonpoint source (NFS)- impaired that are partially or
fully restored, (cumulative)
Number, and national percent, of follow-up actions
that are completed by assessed NPDES (National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) programs.
(cumulative)
Percent of facilities covered by NPDES permits that
are considered current.
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and
report results in both % and #.1
Percent of tribal facilities covered by NPDES permits
that are considered current. a
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and
report results in both % and #.1
Number, and national percent, of facilities covered
under either an individual or general MS-4 permit.
Number, and national percent, of facilities covered
under either an individual or general industrial storm
water permit.
Number of facilities covered under either an
individual or general construction storm water site
permit.
Number of facilities covered under either an
individual or general CAFO permit.
Number, and national percent, of Significant
Industrial Users (SIUs) in POTWs with Pretreatment
Programs that have control mechanisms in place that
implement applicable pretreatment requirements.
Number, and national percent, of Categorical
Industrial Users (CIUs) in non-pretreatment POTWs
that have control mechanisms in place that implement
applicable pretreatment requirements.
Percent of major dischargers in Significant
Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the fiscal
year.
Of the major dischargers in Significant
Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the fiscal
year, the number, and national percent, discharging
pollutant(s) of concern on impaired waters.
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
FY 2009
National
Target
114
88%
(100,977)
88%
(347)
n/a
n/a
n/a
21,813
(98%)
n/a
<22.5%
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
16
76%
(1,357)
100%
(2)
1,347
(94%)
02
6
87%
(2,996)
100%
(2)
1,850
(98%)
03
12
89%
(16,407)
1,710
(98%)
04
25
90%
(18,230)
100%
(13)
3,289
(97%)
05
16
90%
(12,777)
95%
(42)
5,265
(99%)
06
6
90%
(24,073)
90%
(9)
1,998
(95%)
07
17
87%
(14,416)
100%
(16)
1,005
(98%)
08
8
85%
(4,124)
90%
(178)
690
(98%)
09
2
80%
(2,209)
76%
(38)
4,087
(97%)
10
6
75%
(4,388)
80%
(47)
572
(100%)
HQ
<22.5%
Page 7 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
221
2.2.1
221
2.2.1
221
221
ACS
Code
WQ-16
WQ-17
WQ-19a
WQ-19b
WQ-20
WQ-21
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Number, and national percent, of all major publicly-
owned treatment works (POTWs) that comply with
their permitted wastewater discharge standards, (i.e.
POTWs that are not in significant non-compliance)
Fund utilization rate [cumulative loan agreement
dollars to the cumulative funds available for projects]
for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
Number, and national percent, of high priority state
NPDES permits that are issued as scheduled.
Number, and national percent, of high priority state
and EPA (including tribal) NPDES permits, that are
issued as scheduled.
Number of facilities that have traded at least once plus
all facilities covered by an overlay permit that
incorporates trading provisions with an enforceable
cap.
Number of water segments identified as impaired in
2002 for which States and EPA agree that initial
restoration planning is complete (i.e., EPA has
approved all needed TMDLs for pollutants causing
impairments to the waterbody or has approved a
303(d) list that recognizes that the waterbody is
covered by a Watershed Plan [i.e., Category 4b or
Category 5m]). (cumulative)
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
Y
Y
FY 2009
National
Target
4,256
(86%)
93.7%
489
(95%)
589
(95%)
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
96%
17
(94%)
25
(96%)
02
93%
21
(95%)
35
(95%)
03
94%
91
(95%)
95
(95%)
04
92%
63
(95%)
63
(95%)
05
95%
52
(95%)
60
(95%)
06
92%
50
(94%)
58
(95%)
07
89%
117
(95%)
117
(95%)
08
93%
37
(95%)
37
(95%)
09
92%
21
(95%)
26
(93%)
10
95%
20
(95%)
73
(95%)
HQ
4,256
(86%)
Subobjective 2.2.2 Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
2.2.2
222
2.2.2
SP-16
SP-17
SP-18
Prevent water pollution and protect coastal and ocean
systems to improve national and regional coastal
aquatic system health on the 'good/fair/poor' scale of
the National Coastal Condition Report.
Maintain aquatic ecosystem health on the
'good/fair/poor' scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report in the Northeast Region.
Maintain aquatic ecosystem health on the
'good/fair/poor' scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report in the Southeast Region.
Maintain aquatic ecosystem health on the
'good/fair/poor' scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report in the West Coast Region.
1.8
3.8
2
1.8
3.8
2
Page 8 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
222
222
2.2.2
222
2.2.2
222
222
222
222
ACS
Code
SP-19
SP-20
4.3.2
CO-1
CO-2
CO-3
CO-4
CO-5
CO-6
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Maintain aquatic ecosystem health on the
'good/fair/poor' scale of the National Coastal
Condition Report in Puerto Rico.
Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping
sites that will have achieved environmentally
acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's
management plan and measured through on-site
monitoring programs).
Working with partners, protect or restore additional
acres of habitat within the study areas for the 28
estuaries that are part of the National Estuary Program
(NEP).
Number of coastal waterbodies identified in 2002 as
not attaining water quality standards where standards
are now fully attained.
Total coastal and non-coastal acres protected from
vessel sewage by 'no discharge zone(s)'.
Number of National Estuary Program priority actions
in Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plans (CCMPs) that have been completed.
(cumulative)
Rate of return on Federal investment for the National
Estuary Programs [dollar value of 'primary' leveraged
resources (cash or in-kind) divided by Section 320
funds].
Number of dredged material management plans that
are in place for major ports and harbors.
Number of active dredged material ocean dumping
sites that are monitored in the reporting year.
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
1.7
98%
75,000
n/a
n/a
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
100%
3,321
02
100%
1,115
03
100%
5,000
04
90%
30,000
05
n/a
n/a
06
100%
3,000
07
n/a
n/a
08
n/a
n/a
09
100%
5,200
10
100%
2,802
HQ
1.7
GOAL 4
Subob
431
431
4.3.1
ective 4.3.1 Increase Wetlands
SP-21
SP-22
WT-1
Working with partners, achieve a net increase of acres
of wetlands per year with additional focus on
biological and functional measures and assessment of
wetland condition.1
In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, states and tribes, achieve 'no net loss' of
wetlands each year under the Clean Water Act Section
404 regulatory program.
Number of acres restored and improved, under the
President's 2004 Earth Day Initiative (cumulative).
100,000
annual
88,000
100,000
annual
No Net
Loss
88,000
Page 9 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
431
431
431
4.3.1
Subob
4.2.4
4.2.4
4.2.4
Subob
425
425
ACS
Code
WT-2a
WT-2b
WT-3
WT-4
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Number of States that have built capacities in wetland
monitoring, regulation, restoration, water quality
standards, mitigation compliance, and partnership
building.
Number of Tribes that have built capacities in wetland
monitoring, regulation, restoration, water quality
standards, mitigation compliance, and partnership
building.
Percent of Clean Water Act Section 404 standard
permits, upon which EPA coordinated with the
permitting authority (i.e., Corps or State), where a
final permit decision in FY 08 documents
requirements for greater environmental protection
than originally proposed.
Number of states measuring baseline wetland
condition - with plans to assess trends in wetland
condition - as defined through condition indicators
and assessments (cumulative).
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
19
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
3
02
0
03
4
04
1
05
2
06
1
07
2
08
4
09
1
10
1
HQ
ective 4.2.4 Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
SP-23
SP-24
SP-25
Reduce the number of currently exceeded water
quality standards in impaired transboundary segments
of U.S. surface waters.
Number of additional homes provided safe drinking
water in the U.S.-Mexico border area that lacked
access to safe drinking water in 2003. *
Number of additional homes provided adequate
wastewater sanitation in the U.S.-Mexico border area
that lacked access to wastewater sanitation in 2003.
n/a
1,500
105,500
n/a
1,500
100,000
n/a
0
5,500
ective 4.2.5 Sustain and Restore Pacific Island Territories
SP-26
SP-27
Percent of the population served by community water
systems in the U.S. Pacific Island Territories that
receive continuous drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards.
Percent of the time that the sewage treatment plants in
the U.S. Pacific Island Territories comply with permit
limits for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and
total suspended solids (TSS).
72%
64%
Page 10 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
4.2.5
Subob
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
4.3.3
ACS
Code
SP-28
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Percent of days of the beach season that beaches in
each of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories monitored
under the Beach Safety Program will be open and safe
for swimming.
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
86%
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
HQ
ective 4.3.3 Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
4.3.3
SP-29
SP-30
SP-31
SP-32
GL-1
GL-2
GL-3
GL-4a
Improve the overall ecosystem health of the Great
Lakes by preventing water pollution and protecting
aquatic ecosystems.
Average annual percentage decline for the long-term
trend in concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout
and walleye samples.
Average annual percentage decline for the long-term
trend in concentrations of PCBs in the air in the Great
Lakes basin.
Number of Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes Basin
which are restored and de-listed.
Cubic yards of contaminated sediments remediated
(cumulative) in the Great Lakes.
Number, and percent of all NPDES permitted
discharges to the Lakes or major tributaries that have
permit limits that reflect the Guidance's water quality
standards, where applicable.
Number, and Great Lakes percent, using a constant
denominator, of Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO)
permits with a schedule incorporated into an
appropriate enforceable mechanism, including a
permit or enforcement order, with specific dates and
milestones, including a completion date consistent
with Agency guidance, which requires: 1)
Implementation of a Long Term Control Plan (LTCP)
which will result in compliance with the technology
and water quality-based requirements of the Clean
Water Act; or 2) implementation of any other
acceptable CSO control measures consistent with the
1994 CSO Control Policy; or 3) completion of
separation after the baseline date, (cumulative)
Percent of high priority Tier 1 (significant) Great
Lakes beaches where States and local agencies have
put into place water quality monitoring and public
notification programs that comply with the U.S. EPA
National Beaches Guidance.
Number of near term Great Lakes Actions on track.
Y
22.5
5%
7%
5.5 million
2,954
(96%)
136
(90%)
100%
(366)
n/a
1,186
(93%)
23
(88%)
100%
(21)
33
(100%)
1
(100%)
100%
(11)
1,735
(98%)
112
(90%)
100%
(334)
Page 11 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
4.3.3
4.3.3
Subob
4.3.4
4.3.4
4.3.4
4.3.4
4.3.4
4.3.4
4.3.4
4.3.4
Subob
4.3.5
4.3.5
4.3.5
ACS
Code
GL-4b
GL-5
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Number of near term Great Lakes Actions completed.
Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed
within Areas of Concern.
[New measure for FY 091
ective 4.3.4 Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay Ecos
SP-33
SP-34
SP-35
SP-36
SP-37
CB-la
CB-lb
CB-2
Percent of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation goal of
185,000 acres achieved, based on annual monitoring
from prior year.
Percent of Dissolved Oxygen goal of 100% standards
attainment achieved, based on annual monitoring from
the previous calendar year and the preceding 2 years.
Percent of goal achieved for implementation of
nitrogen reduction practices (expressed as progress
meeting the nitrogen reduction goal of 162.5 million
pounds reduced).
Percent of goal achieved for implementation of
phosphorus reduction practices (expressed as progress
meeting the phosphorus reduction goal of 14.36
million pounds).
Percent of goal achieved for implementation of
sediment reduction practices (expressed as progress
meeting the sediment reduction goal of 1.69 million
tons reduced).
Percent of point source nitrogen reduction goal of
49.9 million pounds achieved.
Percent of point source phosphorus reduction goal of
6.16 million pounds achieved.
Percent of forest buffer planting goal of 1 0,000 miles
achieved.
Non-
Commit-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
Y
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
n/a
21
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
HQ
ystem
n/a
n/a
50%
(81.19M
Ibs)
64%
(9.19Mlb)
67%
(1.13M
tons)
74%
(36.92 M
Ibs)
87%
(5.36 M Ibs)
62%
(6,182
miles)
ective 4.3.5 Improve the Health of the Gulf of Mexico
4.3.5
SP-38
SP-39
Improve the overall health of coastal waters of the
Gulf of Mexico on the "good/fair/poor" scale of the
National Coastal Condition Report.
Restore water and habitat quality to meet water
quality standards in impaired segments in 13 priority
areas, (cumulative starting in FY 07)
Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of
acres of important coastal and marine habitats.
(cumulative starting in FY 07)
2.5
96
20,600
Page 12 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
435
4.3.5
4.3.5
435
Subobj
4.3.6
4.3.6
4.3.6
436
Subobj
437
ACS
Code
SP-40
GM-1
GM-3a
GM-3b
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Reduce releases of nutrients throughout the
Mississippi River Basin to reduce the size of the
hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico, as measured by
the 5-year running average of the size of the zone.
Implement integrated bi-national (U.S. and Mexican
Border States) early-warning system to support State
and coastal community efforts to manage harmful
algal blooms (HABs).
Number of near term actions in the Gulf of Mexico
Alliance Governors' Action Plan that are on track. "
Number of near term actions in the Gulf of Mexico
Alliance Governors' Action Plan that are completed.1
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
operational
system to
Mexico
10
63
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
HQ
ective 4.3.6 Restore and Protect Long Island Sound
SP-41
SP-42
SP-43
SP-44
Reduce point source nitrogen discharges to Long
Island Sound as measured by the Long Island Sound
Nitrogen Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL).
Reduce the size of the hypoxic area in Long Island
Sound (i.e., defined as the area in which the long-term
average maximum July-September dissolved oxygen
level is <3mg/l b; reduce the average duration of the
maximum hypoxic event)
Restore or protect acres of coastal habitat, including
tidal wetlands, dunes, riparian buffers, and freshwater
wetlands .
Reopen miles of river and stream corridor to
anadromous fish passage through removal of dams
and barriers or installations of by-pass structures such
as fishways. (cumulative starting in FY 06)
135,374
Ibs/day
(37 323 TE
n/a
1,043
133
ective 4.3.7 Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem
SP-45
Achieve 'no net loss' of stony coral cover (mean
percent stony coral cover) in the Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) and in the
coastal waters of Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach
Counties, Florida, working with all stakeholders
(federal, state, regional, tribal, and local).
Page 13 of 14
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX A: FY 2009 NPM GUIDANCE MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
4.3.7
437
437
Subobj
438
438
438
Subobj
4.3.9
439
4.3.9
ACS
Code
SP-46
SP-47
SP-48
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure
Text
Annually maintain the overall health and functionality
of sea grass beds in the FKNMS as measured by the
long-term sea grass monitoring project that addresses
composition and abundance, productivity, and
nutrient availability.
Annually maintain the overall water quality of the nea
shore and coastal waters of the FKNMS.
Improve the water quality of the Everglades
ecosystem as measured by total phosphorus, including
meeting the 10 parts per billion (ppb) total phosphorus
criterion throughout the Everglades Protection Area
marsh and the effluent limits to be established for
discharges from storm water treatment areas.
Non-
ment
Indicator
(Y/N)
State
Grant
Measure
(Y/N)
FY 2009
National
Target
• •
Maintain
Baseline
Maintain
Baseline
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
HQ
ective 4.3.8 Restore and Protect the Puget Sound Basin
SP-49
SP-50
SP-51
Improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest
restrictions in acres of shellfish bed growing areas
impacted by degraded or declining water quality.
(cumulative starting in FY 06)
Remediate acres of prioritized contaminated
sediments, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
Restore acres of tidally- and seasonally-influenced
estuarine wetlands, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
600
125
5 700
ective 4.3.9 Restore and Protect the Columbia River Basin
SP-52
SP-53
SP-54
Protect, enhance, or restore acres of wetland habitat
and acres of upland habitat in the Lower Columbia
River watershed, (cumulative starting in FY 05)
Clean up acres of known contaminated sediments.
(cumulative starting in FY 06)
Demonstrate a reduction in mean concentration of
contaminants of concern found in water and fish
tissue, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
10,000
5
n/a
Superscript (a) denotes change in reporting
Page 14 of 14
-------
Appendix B
FY 2009 Water State Grant Measures Appendix
Fiscal Year 2009
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX B: FY 2009 STATE GRANT MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
ACS
Code
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure Text
FY 2009
National
Target
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
HQ
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
Sub-objective 2.1.1: Water safe to drink
Grant Program: Public Water System Supervision SDWA Section 1443(a)
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.1
SP-1
SP-4a
SP-4b
SDW-la
Percent of the population served by community water
systems that receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards through
approaches including effective treatment and source water
protection.
Percent of community water systems that meet all
applicable health-based standards through approaches that
include effective treatment and source water protection.
Percent of community water systems where risk to public
health is minimized through source water protection.
Percent of the population served by community water
systems where risk to public health is minimized through
source water protection.
Percent of community water systems (CWSs) that have
undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years
(five years for outstanding performers) as required under
the Interim Enhanced and Long-Term I Surface Water
Treatment Rules.
89%
88%
35%
45%
93%
89%
82%
57%
81%
90%
75%
86%
60%
78%
95%
90%
90%
23%
55%
91%
91%
89%
46%
51%
94%
91%
88%
39%
63%
84%
89%
87%
30%
46%
93%
92%
87%
18%
20%
95%
90%
90%
38%
32%
90%
95%
90%
1%
1%
100%
90%
89%
35%
72%
95%
Grant Program: Underground Injection Control
2.1.1
2.1.1
SDW-6
SDW-7a
Percent of identified Class V Motor Vehicle Waste
Disposal wells that are closed or permitted, (cumulative)
Percent of deep injection wells that are used to inject
industrial, municipal, or hazardous waste (Class I) that
lose mechanical integrity and are returned to compliance
within 180 days thereby reducing the potential to endanger
underground sources of drinking water.3
70%
89%
80%
n/a
75%
n/a
75%
n/a
73%
90%
65%
75%
80%
90%
90%
95%
85%
95%
75%
90%
20%
75%
Page 1 of 4
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX B: FY 2009 STATE GRANT MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.1.1
2.1.1
ACS
Code
SDW-
7b
SDW-Vc
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure Text
Percent of deep injection wells that are used to enhance oil
recovery or that are used for the disposal or storage of
other oil production related activities (Class II) that lose
mechanical integrity and are returned to compliance within
180 days thereby reducing the potential to endanger
underground sources of drinking water.3
Percent of deep injection wells that are used for salt
solution mining (Class III) that lose mechanical integrity
and are returned to compliance within 180 days thereby
reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of
drinking water.3
FY 2009
National
Target
87%
91%
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
n/a
n/a
02
90%
90%
03
98%
100%
04
70%
100%
05
65%
75%
06
90%
90%
07
90%
95%
08
90%
95%
09
90%
90%
10
85%
n/a
HQ
Subobjective 2.1.3 Water Safe for Swimming
Grant Program: Beaches Protection
2.1.3
2.1.3
SP-9
SS-2
Percent of days of the beach season that coastal and Great
Lakes beaches monitored by state beach safety programs
are open and safe for swimming.
Percent of all Tier I (significant) public beaches that are
monitored and managed under the BEACH Act program.
91%
99%
98%
100%
96%
100%
95%
100%
92%
100%
85%
100%
82%
95%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
86.6%
100%
93%
93%
Subobjective 2.2.1 Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Grant Program: Water Pollution Control (Section 106)
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
2.2.1
SP-10
WQ-la
WQ-lb
WQ-3a
WQ-5
Number of waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining
water quality standards where standards are now fully
attained, (cumulative)
Number of States and Territories that have adopted EPA
approved nutrient criteria into their water quality
standards, (cumulative)
Number of States and Territories that are on schedule with
a mutually agreed-upon plan to adopt nutrient criteria into
their water quality standards, (annual)
Number, and national percent, of States and Territories
that within the preceding three year period, submitted new
or revised water quality criteria acceptable to EPA that
reflect new scientific information from EPA or other
resources not considered in the previous standards.
Number of States and Territories that have adopted and are
implementing their monitoring strategies in keeping with
established schedules.
1,768
12
35
34
(60 7%)
56
76
3
3
2
6
84
0
4
2
4
370
1
5
4
6
360
2
7
6
8
309
0
5
5
6
135
1
4
4
5
230
1
3
3
4
96
0
3
5
6
56
4
1
2
7
52
0
0
1
4
Page 2 of 4
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX B: FY 2009 STATE GRANT MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.2.1
22 1
2.2.1
221
221
221
2.2.1
7 7 1
2.2.1
ACS
Code
WQ-8b
WQ-13a
WQ-13b
WQ-13c
WQ-13d
WQ-14a
WQ-15a
WO 19a
WQ-20
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure Text
Number, and national percent, of approved TMDLs, that
are established by States and approved by EPA [State
TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with national policy.
Note: A TMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants
in order to attain water quality standards. The terms
'approved' and 'established' refer to the completion and
approval of the TMDL itself.
Percent of facilities covered by NPDES permits that are
considered current. a
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and report
results in both % and #.]
Number, and national percent, of facilities covered under
either an individual or general MS-4 permit.
Number, and national percent, of facilities covered under
either an individual or general industrial storm water
permit.
Number of facilities covered under either an individual or
general construction storm water site permit.
Number of facilities covered under either an individual or
general CAFO permit.
Number, and national percent, of Significant Industrial
Users (SIUs) in POTWs with Pretreatment Programs that
have control mechanisms in place that implement
applicable pretreatment requirements.
Percent of major dischargers in Significant
Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the fiscal year.
Number, and national percent, of high priority state
NPDES permits that are issued as scheduled.
Number of facilities that have traded at least once plus all
facilities covered by an overlay permit that incorporates
trading provisions with an enforceable cap.
FY 2009
National
Target
3,085
(81%)
88%
(100,977)
n/a
n/a
n/a
21,813
(98%)
<22.5%
489
(95%)
n/a
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
230
76%
(1,357)
1,347
(94%)
17
(94%)
02
89
87%
(2,996)
1,850
(98%)
21
(95%)
03
1,035
89%
(16,407)
1,710
(98%)
91
(95%)
04
393
90%
(18,230)
3,289
(97%)
63
(95%)
05
445
90%
(12,777)
5,265
(99%)
52
(95%)
06
178
90%
(24,073)
1,998
(95%)
50
(94%)
07
161
87%
(14,416)
1,005
(98%)
117
(95%)
08
230
85%
(4,124)
690
(98%)
37
(95%)
09
43
80%
(2,209)
4,087
(97%)
21
(95%)
10
281
75%
(4,388)
572
(100%)
20
(95%)
HQ
<22.5%
Page 3 of 4
-------
OFFICE OF WATER: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM
APPENDIX B: FY 2009 STATE GRANT MEASURES APPENDIX
G/O/S
2.1.3
ACS
Code
SS-1
FY 2009 National Water Program Guidance Measure Text
Number and national percent, using a constant
denominator, of Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) permits
with a schedule incorporated into an appropriate
enforceable mechanism, including a permit or enforcement
order, with specific dates and milestones, including a
completion date consistent with Agency guidance, which
requires: ^Implementation of a Long Term Control Plan
(LTCP) which will result in compliance with the
technology and water quality -based requirements of the
Clean Water Act; or 2) implementation of any other
acceptable CSO control measures consistent with the 1994
CSO Control Policy; or 3) completion of separation after
the baseline date, (cumulative)
FY 2009
National
Target
668
(78%)
REGIONAL OFFICE
01
76
(93%)
02
69
(65%)
03
197
(83%)
04
15
(63%)
05
111
(75%)
06
n/a
07
20
(83%)
08
1
(100%)
09
3
(100%)
10
15
(100%)
HQ
Grant Program: Non-Point Source (Section 319)
2.2.1
WQ-10
Number of waterbodies identified by States (in 1998/2000
or subsequent years) as being primarily nonpoint source
(NFS)- impaired that are partially or fully restored.
(cumulative)
114
16
6
12
25
16
6
17
8
2
6
FY 2009 state grant measures are still under review at time of this printing, as of April 2008
Superscript (a) denotes change in reporting
Page 4 of 4
-------
Appendix C
Explanation of Key Changes Summary
Fiscal Year 2009
"*"Yi '
' , %,
\. •" -**c»i ,'
-------
APPENDIX C: Explanation of Changes from FY 2008 to FY 2009
Office of Water - National Water Program Guidance FY 2009
Change from FY 2008 Guidance Document
Reason for Change
Effected Pages and Sections
Priorities
EPA regional water priorities and their
linkage to the Administrator and National
Water Program priorities are highlighted.
To present and discuss EPA regional water
priorities.
Pages i and 3. Executive
Summary and Introduction.
Strategies
Environmental Justice (EJ) Considerations.
The National Water Program places emphasis
on achieving results in areas with potential
environmental justice concerns through two
national EJ priorities under Goal 2 that are
covered by the Water Safe to Drink and Fish
and Shellfish Safe to Eat sub-objectives
(2.1.1 and 2.1.2 respectively) and other EJ
water related elements (U.S.-Mexico Border,
Pacific Islands, and Alaska Villages
programs).
Aligning the Environmental Justice Action
Plan to specific achievements of goals in the
EPA Strategic Plan and National Water
Programs. An EJ section was added to the
Guidance.
Pages 44-45, Section VI
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Measures SDW-7a, b, c: Text and definition
for all 3 measures were revised for FY 2009
to track the percent of deep injection wells
that loses mechanical integrity and is returned
to compliance within 180 days.
Aligning measures to PART and revising
measure definition to improve planning and
reporting.
Pages 7-8 of the narrative
and detailed measure
information for SDW-7 in
Appendix D.
Measure SDW-8: Measure text and
definition were revised for FY 2009 to track
the percent of high priority Class V wells
identified in sensitive ground water protection
areas that are closed or permitted. The
measure will still set targets and
commitments and report results in both
percent and number of wells.
Revising measure definition and text to
improve planning and reporting.
Page 8 of the narrative and
detailed measure
information for SDW-8 in
Appendix D.
Measure WQ-18: Measure deleted for FY
2009.
Deleting an efficiency measure that is not
used for PART tracking.
Measure is not in FY 2009
National Water Program
-------
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Measures WQ-19a and b:
(1) Revised measure text for FY 2010. WQ-
19a: "Number of high priority state NPDES
permits that are issued in the fiscal year".
WQ-19b: "Number of high priority state and
EPA (including tribal) NPDES permits that
are issued in the fiscal year".
(2) Measure definition will be revised in FY
2010 to ensure that a universe is available in
time for target and commitment setting in
each fiscal year.
Under the current measure, commitments are
finalized prior to the start of a fiscal year (in
September), but the universe is not
established until January of that fiscal year (4
months later).
Measure WQ-21: For FY 2009,
georeferencing data will be requested for
reported segments.
Measure CO-1: Measure text was modified
to "Number of coastal waterbodies identified
in 2002 as not attaining water quality
standards where standards are now fully
attained."
Measure CO-2: Measure was modified to
In an effort to improve planning and
reporting of this measure and ensure that a
universe is provided at the annual
commitment stage, revisions are proposed
for the measure text and definition.
In order for this measure to comport with
the cycle of other measures, to simplify the
process, and to be more transparent, EPA is
proposing to shift the time period for
locking down the priority permits universe.
EPA is also proposing to shift to a
commitment for the number of priority
permits issued rather than a percentage for
FY 2010. The new schedule would allow
the universe to be available before the time
of the target and commitment setting.
Planning for FY 2010 measure development
need to begin immediately to ensure that a
universe is developed by early 2009.
To help obtain data concerning progress
toward implementation of the pollution
controls needed to restore designated uses in
impaired waters.
Georeferencing data will also help the
development of a new measure to track
implementation and define waters that are
"in the pipeline" toward full standards
attainment.
Modify measure text to align to SP-10.
Measure was modified to track both inland
Guidance.
Page 16 of the narrative.
The current measure and
proposed changes are
presented in Appendix D
under detailed information
for WQ-19a and b.
Pages 18-19; detailed
measure information for
WQ-21 in Appendix D
Page 20; detailed measure
information for CO-1 in
Appendix D
Page 21; detailed measure
Appendix C
-------
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Tracking
Process
Contacts
track total coastal and non-coastal acres
protected from vessel sewage by "no
discharge zone(s)."
Measure WT-4: Measure was modified to
tract the number of states measuring and
reporting baseline wetland condition using
condition indicators and assessments.
Measure SP-24: Measure was modified to
tract the number of additional homes
provided safe drinking water in the U.S-
Mexico Border area.
Measure SP-25: Measure was modified to
tract the number of additional homes
provided adequate wastewater sanitation in
the U.S-Mexico Border area.
Measure GL-5: Number of Beneficial Use
Impairments removed within Areas of
Concern.
Measure GM-2: Measure deleted for FY
2009
No Change
Vinh Nguyen, Program Planning Leader
and coastal no discharge zones (NDZs).
NDZs will be measured in area, not
coastline miles. As a result, the "universe"
will consist of the total area of water
eligible to be designated as a NDZ under the
current regulations.
Modify measure text and definition to
improve planning and set more realistic
reporting goals for the regions.
Modify measure text to align to PART
measure.
Modify measure text to align to PART
measure.
Add a new measure from the 2007 PART
review.
Measure is no longer needed because the
reduction target has been met and the
cooperative effort between EPA an FDA is
complete.
Not applicable
New planning lead for the Office of Water
information for CO-2 in
Appendix D
Page 24; detailed measure
information for WT-4 in
Appendix D
Detailed measure
information for SP-24 in
Appendix D
Detailed measure
information for SP-25 in
Appendix D
Detailed measure
information for GL-5 in
Appendix D
Measure is not in FY 2009
National Water Program
Guidance.
Appendix C
-------
Appendix D
Detailed FY2009 Measures Appendix:
Measures with National and Regional Data and Targets
Fiscal Year 2009
-**', ',
-------
Table of Contents
Subobjective Slide Number Subobjective Slide Number
1) Water Safe to Drink 2
9) Great Lakes
2) Safe Fish and Shellfish 20 10) Chesapeake Bay
3) Safe Swimming 22 11) Gulf of Mexico
4) Water Quality 26 12) Long Island Sound
5) Oceans/Coastal 55 13) South Florida
6) Wetlands 65 14) Puget Sound
7) Mexico Border 70 15) Columbia River
76
84
89
93
96
99
101
8) Pacific Islands 73
Measure Type K
PART measure PA
Indicator measure
State Grant measure S
Quarterly Management Report Measure (2008) Qf
FY 2009 CJ Budget Measure Bl
Senior Management Measure Sl\
;y Definition
RT PART or PART-supported measure
National Program Guidance measure with no annual target
G Measure reported in state grants
AR Reported quarterly to the DA for performance asse
;ssment
JD Targeted measures in the FY 2009 Congressional Justification
IM Management performance assessment measure
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: Subobjective 2.1.1
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of the population served by community water systems that
receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards through
approaches including effective treatment and source water protection.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Reg 1
92.5%
92%
92%
89%
89%
Uni\«rse (in millions) 14.5
Reg 2 Reg 3
55.3% 93.2%
61% 93%
77% 95%
75% 92%
75% 90%
31.9 24.7
Reg 4
Reg 5
94.1%
Reg 6
87.8%
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
91.2% 94.7% 94.6% 94.8% 89%
91% 96% 98% 95% 89%
93.0% 97% 95% 92% 92%
2011 Target: 91%
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 05 and FY 06 end-of-year data are from SDWIS.
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-1
El
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of community water systems that meet all applicable health-
based standards through approaches that include effective treatment and source water
protection.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6
2005 Baseline 85.7% 86.4% 91.8% 91.0% 92.0% 86.2%
2006 End-of-Year 84% 88% 91% 91% 91% 88%
2007 End-of-Year 83% 87% 91% 91% 90% 88%
2008 Commitment 82% 86% 91% 89% 87% 87%
2009 Target 82% 86% 90% 89% 88% 87%
Universe 2,728 3,929 4,561 8,938 7,408 8,221
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure starting in FY 08.
F Y 06 and F Y 07 end-of-year data not from ACS .
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
86.8% 90.3% 91.6% 87.3% 89.0%
88% 90% 91% 87% 89.3%
87.3% 91% 89% 88% 89%
91% 90.0% 90% 89% 88%
87% 90% 90% 89% 88%
4,125 3,164 4,619 4,417 52,110
2011 Target: 90%
2
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-2
El
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of "person months" (i.e., all persons served by community
water systems times 12 months) during which community water systems provide drinking water
that meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6
2005 End-of-Year 97% 80% 96% 98% 96% 96%
2006 End-of-Year 97.4% 90.8% 97.4% 97.9% 96.4% 96.1%
2007 End-of-Year 96% 92% 99% 98% 97% 97%
2008 Commitment 94.5% 90% 96% 93% 95% 93.5%
2009 Target 94.5% 90% 96% 94% 95% 95%
Universe (in millions) 147 383 296 667 510 448
National Program Manager Comments:
FY06 end-of-year data not from ACS. Indicator measure in FY 07.
V
PART; BUD; SMM
Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Tola
97% 99% 98% 99% 95.2%
97% 98.9% 99.1% 98.5% 96.8%
98% 99% 97% 98% 97%
95% 95.5% 98% 95% 94%
95% 95% 98% 95% 95%
141 121 569 128 3,437
2011 Target: 96%
J
3
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-3
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of the population in Indian country served by community
water systems that receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking
water standards.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 1
100%
100%
100%
90%
93%
Reg 2
100%
100%
100%
90%
90%
41,095 8,725
Reg 3
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 4
Reg5
99.5%
100%
Reg 6
90.4%
92%
81%
82.5%
Reg 7
86.5%
Reg 9
BUD; SMM
Reg 10 Total
21,058 85,471 69,038
Reg 8
82.6%
88,563 395,425 46,968 761,623
2011 Target: i
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 05 and FY 06 end-of-year data are from SDWIS.
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-4 National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of community water systems and percent of the population served by
community water systems where risk to public health is minimized through source water protection.
(SP-4a) Community water systems:
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3
2005 Baseline 51% 30% 12%
2006 End-of-Year 52% 56% 14%
2007 End-of-Year 57% 58% 21%
2008 Commitment 53% 58% 21%
2009 Target 57% 60% 23%
Universe (FY 07) 2,728 3,929 4,561
Reg 4
21%
22%
40%
Reg5
19%
32%
39%
32%
13%
27%
30%
8,221
Reg?
13%
14%
Reg 8
20%
32%
33%
37%
38%
3,164
Reg 9 Reg 10
35%
4,417
PART; SG
Total % Total #
10,281
20%
24%
33%
27%
35%
100%
12,616
17,183
14,007
18,224
52,069
2011 Target: 50%
(SP-4b) Population:
Reg1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year 77%
2007 End-of-Year 81%
2008 Commitment 77%
2009 Target 81%
Universe (in millions) 14.5
Reg 2
58%
79%
81%
Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5
53%
54%
24%
43%
51%
55.6
43%
32%
37.3
National Program Manager Comments:
21%
27%
25%
32%
10.1
Reg 9 Reg 10 Total %
n/a
0% 67% 34%
72%
10.6
100%
2011 Target: 62%
SG
Total #
n/a
32.6
129.5
112.4
138.4
288.3
SP-4b is a new measure starting in FY 08. Note: "Minimized risk" is achieved by the substantial implementation, as determined
by the state, of actions in a source water protection strategy. The universe is the most recent SDWIS inventory of community
water systems. FY 06 and FY 07 end-of-year adjusted data not from ACS.
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-5
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Number of homes on tribal lands lacking access to safe drinking
water.
PART
National Commitment (#) %
2003 Baseline 38,637 12.1%
2005 End-of-Year 38,692 12.1%
2006 End-of-Year 38,737 12.1%
2007 End-of-Year 36,575 11.5%
2008 Commitment 30,587 9.5%
2009 Target 28,977 9.0%
Universe 319,070 100%
2015 Target: Reduce by half from 2003 baseline
(from38,637to 19,319)
National Program Manager Comments:
This measure involves coordination with other federal agencies.
Water Safe to Drink
fvj
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure #: SDW-1
Measure Description: Percent of community water systems (CWSs) and number of tribal community
water systems that have undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years (five years for outstanding
performers) as required under the Interim Enhanced and Long-Term 1 Surface Water Treatment Rules.
(SDW-la) CWSs in States: PART; BUD; SG
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (FY 07)
91%
95%
91%
1,235
94%
1,802
84%
1,354
91%
93%
90%
780
100%
100%
100%
917
n/a*
n/a*
(SDW-lb) CWSs in Tribes:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (FY07)
Reg 1
n/a
Reg 2
1
1
2
2
2
Reg 3
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 4
1
1
1
1
1
1
Reg5
2
2
2
2
2
Reg 6
1
1
1
5
7
Reg 7
1
4
1
1
1
Reg8
0
11
17
10
12
9
13
18
Reg 10
7
3
QMR
Total
22
37
51
National Program Manager Comments:
*Prior to FY 07, this measure tracked states, rather than CWSs, in compliance with this regulation. **Region
2 will not have FY 07 end-of-year data until April 2008. The national FY 07 end-of-year result provided is
an estimate.
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-2
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of the data for violations of health-based standards at public
water systems that is accurate and complete in SDWIS-FED for all maximum contaminant
level and treatment technique rules (excluding the Lead and Copper Rule).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
PART; I
Total
n/a
n/a
60%
Indicator
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
The FY 07 end-of-year result is based on audits conducted during 2005 and 2006. Future results will be based on
three-year rolling data from data verification audits conducted during the past 3 calendar years.
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-3
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of the lead action level data that for the Lead and Copper
Rule, for community water systems serving over 3,300 people, that is complete in SDWIS-
FED.
i
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 1 0 Total
2002-2004 Results 89% 97% 86% 87% 83% 47% 68% 90% 88% 85% 80%
2005-2007 Results n/a*
2008 Commitment Indicator
2009 Target Indicator
Universe 435 699 676 2,006 1,594 1,438 440 366 913 387 8,954
National Program Manager Comments:
*This measure is calculated every three years to match the requirements for lead sampling. The 2005-2007
results will be calculated in April 2008.
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-4
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Fund utilization rate [cumulative dollar amount of loan agreements
divided by cumulative funds available for projects] for the Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund (DWSRF).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (2007) (in
$ millions)
Reg 1
78.5%
Reg 2
93%
89%
91%
91%
91%
Reg 3
83.3%
Reg 4
Reg 5
87%
81%
84%
82%
85%
Reg 6
64.5%
72%
78%
76%
79%
Reg 7
91.0%
Reg 8
Reg 9
80%
85%
85%
80%
PART; BUD
Total
Reg 10
94.3%
92%
96%
95%
94%
$1,378.1 $2,686.4 $832.3 $1,527.6 $2,812.2 $1,283.7
$1,006.8 $1,321.7 $592.1 $14,419.7
National Program Manager Comments:
Universe represents the funds available for projects for the DWSRF through 2007, in millions of dollars
(i.e., the denominator of the measure).
10
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-5
fvj
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Number of Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) projects
that have initiated operations.
PART; BUD
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6
320
374
415
440
455
311
311
366
386
395
261
297
353
415
415
501
501
557
630
702
794
875
79
119
140
162
229
277
328
242
331
378
350
380
123
137
137
177
201
Reg 10
140
225
240
Cumulati\«
Total
2,611
3,063
3,526
3,718
3,968
n/a
Annual
increment
n/a
452
463
192
250
National Program Manager Comments:
This measure will be annually reported in ACS in FY 2009.
The 2006 PART annual target is 425; the 2007 PART annual target is 430.
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-6
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of identified Class V Motor Vehicle Waste Disposal wells that
are closed or permitted, (cumulative)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse (FY 07)*
Reg 1
100%
100%
Reg 2 Reg 3
102% 96%
75%
1,001
75%
3,708
77%
73%
73%
73%
119
Reg5
25%
Reg 6
72%
100%
100%
Reg?
101%
100%
100%
90%
90%
246
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total # Total %
72%
91%
91%
85%
85%
1,894
30.0% 9,089 94%
36% 6,842 79%
51% 10,766 85%
20% 9,237 73%
20% TBD 70%
1,181 12,654 100%
National Program Manager Comments:
*The universe reflects FY 07 end-of-year and is subject to change in FY (
12
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-7a
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of deep injection wells that are used to inject industrial,
municipal, or hazardous waste (Class I) that lose mechanical integrity and are returned to
compliance within 180 days, thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground
sources of drinking water.
(SDW-7a) Class I:
Reg1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (FY 07)*
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 2 Reg 3
100%
100%
Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9
75%
48
100%
100%
100%
100%
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 10 Total* Total %
n/a n/a
539 98%
100%
100%
75%
22
581
494
TBD
582
National Program Manager Comments:
Measure revised for F Y 09. Universe for FY 09 will be updated to reflect the forecasted number of
mechanical integrity failures.
*The universe reflects FY 07 end-of-year and is subject to change in FY 08.
Indicator measure in FY 06 and FY 07.
13
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-7b
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of deep injection wells, that are used to enhance oil
recovery or that are used for the disposal or storage of other oil production related activities
(Class II), that lose mechanical integrity and are returned to compliance within 180 days,
thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of drinking water.
(SDW-7b) Class II:
Reg 1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year n/a
2007 End-of-Year n/a
2008 Commitment n/a
2009 Target n/a
Universe (FY 07)* n/a
Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9
70%
4,678
10,863 73,858 16,896 8,629 30,158
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 10 Total # Total %
n/a n/a
99% 143,267 98%
97% 144,328 96%
99% 115,197 77%
85% TBD 87%
1,275 149,607 100%
National Program Manager Comments:
Measure revised for F Y 09. Universe for F Y 09 will be updated to reflect the forecasted number of
mechanical integrity failures.
*The universe reflects FY 07 end-of-year and is subject to change in FY 08.
Indicator measure in FY 06 and FY 07..
14
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-7c National
Office Lead: OGWDW
Ei
Measure Description: Percent of deep injection wells that are used for salt solution mining
(Class III) that lose mechanical integrity and are returned to compliance within 180 days,
thereby reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of drinking water.
(SDW-7c) Class III:
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7
2005 End-of-Year
2006 End-of-Year n/a 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% 100%
2007 End-of-Year n/a 100% 100% 100% 98% 94% 100%
2008 Commitment n/a 85% 95% 100% 85% 65% 95%
2009 Target n/a 90% 100% 100% 75% 90% 95%
Universe (FY 07)* n/a 125 25 5 95 279 139
National Program Manager Comments:
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total #
n/a
97% 100% n/a 5,375
70% 100% n/a 863
95% 95% n/a 734
95% 90% n/a TBD
10 207 n/a 885
f Measure revised for F Y 09. Universe for F Y 09 will be updated to reflect the forecasted number of
mechanical integrity failures.
*The universe reflects F Y 07 end-of-year and is subject to change in FY 08
\^ Indicator measure in FY 06 and FY 07.
J
Total %
n/a
100%
98%
83%
91%
100%
15
8
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-8
National Office Lead: OGWDW
Measure Description: Percent of high priority Class V wells identified in sensitive ground
water protection areas that are closed or permitted, (cumulative)
PART; BUD
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total # Total'
2005 End-ofYear
2006 End-ofYear
2007 End-ofYear
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
data n/a
data n/a
data n/a
56
n/a
99.8%
12,075
12,100
62%
100
103%
2,734
2,900
3,295
30
97%
92
44
50%
50%
118
data n/a
0
2
20%
100%
0
354
95%
70%
TBD
4
50%
2,042
5,073
21%
621
20%
50
n/a
3,635
4,900
17,664
TBD
National Program Manager Comments:
Measure revised for FY 09. Universe for FY 09 will be updated for the revised measure. Note: Measure will
still set target and commitment and report results in both percent and number.
"Sensitive ground water protection areas" are defined by the UIC primacy program director, but at a
minimum must include ground water based community water system source water areas. This measure does
not report all of the high priority wells that are being closed or permitted because some states do not
distinguish between high priority wells in ground water based community water system source water areas
and other areas.
Indicator measure in FY 06 and F Y 07. Regional results for FY 06 and FY07 are a mixture of annual and
\ cumulative data. J
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-9
National Office Lead: OGWDW/OWOW
Measure Description: Percent of community water system intakes for which source water
was assessed for drinking water use during the most recent reporting cycle.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2009 Target
Universe (2007)
I
Total
n/a
n/a
n/a
Indicator
5,805
National Program Manager Comments:
HQ reports results by Region/nationally, based on data collected to support Clean Water Act (CWA) measures
when data becomes available. The number of states reporting drinking water use assessments to the
Assessment Database (ADB) under the Integrated Reporting Guidance will increase over time.
The universe of this measure is the number of waters with community water system (CWS) intakes that have
been indexed to the national hydrography dataset (NHD). The reported data are based on an overlay of the
universe of waters with CWS intakes and the most recently accessible §305(b) reports stored in ATTAINS.
The reported data may be limited to waters assessed for any use because of the variety of state approaches to
their assessment process.
17
-------
Water Safe to Drink
Measure #: SDW-10 National Office Lead: OGWDW/OWOW
Measure Description: Percent of waterbody impairments identified by States in 2002, in which
there is a community water system intake and the impairment cause is for either a drinking water use or
a pollutant that is regulated as a drinking water contaminant, for which: (a) there is a TMDL, and (b) the
waterbody impairments have been restored.
(SDW-lOa) TMDL: I
Reg1 Reg2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg9 Reg 10
2005 Baseline
2007 End-of-Year
2009 Target
Universe
(SDW-lOb) Waterbody Impairments have been restored:
Reg1 Reg2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg9 Reg 10
2005 Baseline
2007 End-of-Year
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
/HQ reports results by Region/nationally based on data collected to support Subobjective 2.2.1. Baselines and
targets to be determined in consultation with OWOW after geo-referencing baseline has been established for
Clean Water Act (CWA) reporting and with consideration of targets established for CWA reporting. The
universe is the number of waters with community water system (CWS) intakes that have been indexed to the
national hydrography dataset (NHD) and that are listed in ATTAINS as impaired for any reason in that
particular reporting cycle. The reported data are based on an overlay of the universe and the §303(d) related
data in ATTAINS. Interpreting these overlays may be limited to snap shots of status for the waters of each
Total
n/a
n/a
Indicator
n/a
I
Total
n/a
n/a
Indicator
n/a
18
Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-6
National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood
above the level of concern.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-7
National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Percent of state-monitored shellfish growing acres impacted by
anthropogenic sources that are approved or conditionally approved for use.
SP-6
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
5.7%
n/a
n/a
5.5%
5.2%
n/a
SP-7
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
65% to 85%
n/a
data not available
65% to 85%
65% to 85%
16.3 million acres
2011 Target: 4.6%
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: Maintain or improve
SP-6 is a new measure starting in F Y 08.
19
10
-------
Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
Measure #: Strategic Target FS-1
National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Percent of river miles and lake acres where fish tissue will be
assessed to support waterbody-specific or regional consumption advisories or a determination
that no consumption advice is necessary. (Great Lakes measured separately; Alaska not
included)
(FS-la) River miles:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
I
National Commitment
24% (840,000)
26% (930,000)*
26% (910,000)
Indicator
Indicator
100% (3.5 million)
(FS-lb) Lake acres:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
I
National Commitment
35% (14 million)
38% (15.4 million)*
38% (15.2 million)
Indicator
Indicator
100% (40 million)
National Program Manager Comments:
*This is the actual FY 06 end-of-year result. An estimated F Y 06 end-of-year result had been entered in ACS.
20
Water Safe for Swimming
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-8
National Office Lead: OST/OWOW
Measure Description: Number of waterbome disease outbreaks attributable to swimming in
or other recreational contact with coastal and Great Lakes waters, measured as a 5-year
average.
BUD
National Commitment
2005 Baseline 2
2006 End-of-Year n/a
2007 End-of-Year n/a
2008 Commitment 2
2009 Target 2
Universe n/a
2011 Target: 2 per year
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure starting in F Y (
21
11
-------
Water Safe for Swimming
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-9
National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Percent of days of the beach season that coastal and Great Lakes
beaches monitored by state beach safety programs are open and safe for swimming.
Reg 1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (2006)
Reg 2
97.2%
96%
105,772
Reg 3
98.5%
Reg 4
96.3%
97.8% 96.5%
Reg 5
95.5%
85%
52,559
Reg 6
93.0%
Reg 7 Reg 8
Reg 9
95.3%
97.4%
92.4%
Reg 10
96.2%
96.4%
BUD; SG
Total % Total #
96%* 584,150
595,592
674,810***
n/a
97%
95.2%
91*
91*
233,000 13,896 100%
2011 Target: 96%
TBD
709,170
National Program Manager Comments:
Universe changes annually.
*In FY 05 and F Y 06, only a national commitment/end-of-year number was reported in ACS.
**Per ACS, Region 9's FY 07 commitment reflects the inclusion of Guam, American Samoa, and the
Northern Marianas for the first time. These territories have a higher percentage of beach season day
closures resulting in a lower commitment at the regional and national levels.
*** This is Calendar Year 2006 data.
\ Universe equals the total number of beach season days that beaches were open.
22
Water Safe for Swimming
Measure #: SS-1
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number and national percent, using a constant denominator, of Combined Sewer
Overflow (CSO) permits with a schedule incorporated into an appropriate enforceable mechanism,
including a permit or enforcement order, with specific dates and milestones, including a completion date
consistent with Agency guidance, which requires: 1) Implementation of a Long Lerm Control Plan (LLCP)
which will result in compliance with the technology and water quality-based requirements of the Clean
Water Act; or 2) implementation of any other acceptable CSO control measures consistent with the 1994
CSO Control Policy; or 3) completion of separation after the baseline date, (cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5
2007 Baseline* 75(91%) 51(48%) 175(74%) 9(38%) 200(55%)
2006 End-ofYear (74)90% (44)42% (104)47% (12)43% (187)53%
2007 End-ofYear 75(91%) 51(48%) 156(70%) 9(38%) 238(67%)
2008 Commitment 76(93%) 64(60%) 187(79%) 10(42%) 232(64%)
2009Target 76(93%) 69(65%) 197(83%) 15(63%) 272(75%)
Universe 82 106 236 24 362
National Program Manager Comments:
Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total #
n/a 7(29%) 1(100%) 3(100%) 15(100%) 536
n/a (6) 25% (1) 100% (3) 100% (14) 93% 445**
n/a 11(46%) 1(100%) 3(100%) 15(100%) 559
n/a 16(67%) 1(100%) 3(100%) 15(100%) 604
n/a 20(83%) 1(100%) 3(100%) 15(100%) 668
n/a 24 1 3 15 853
SG
Total %
*Measure revised for FY 08. FY 06 and FY 07 numbers are based on a slightly different definition.
Beginning in FY 08, OECA and OWM agreed on common language and data collection procedures to
streamline this measure. While the definition is slightly different for OWM, the past data is still valid for
comparison with future data. We have included a revised baseline to demonstrate the real progress for FY
08. While national numbers are fairly stable, the Regional baselines did change.
**FY 06 commitments and results are shown in ACS as percents.
23
12
-------
Water Safe for Swimming |^3tf|
tRjtojtftoirftj
Measure #: SS-2
l_
National Office Lead: OST
_l
Measure Description: Percent of all Tier I (significant) public beaches that are monitored
and managed under the BEACH Act program.
Reg1
2005 Baseline 100%
2006 End-of-Year 100%
2007 End-of-Year 100%
2008 Commitment 100%
2009 Target 100%
Universe* 905
Reg 2
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
365
Reg 3 Reg 4
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 100%
100% 95%
100% 100%
89 481
SG
Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total % Total*
100% 92% n/a n/a 100% 80% 96.5% 2,582
100% 95% n/a n/a 100% 100% 99.4% 2,660
100% 99% n/a n/a 100% 100% 100% 2,676
100% 95% n/a n/a 100% 100% 99% 2,649
100% 95% n/a n/a 100% 93% 99% TBD
327 79 n/a n/a 376 75 100% 2,697
National Program Manager Comments:
s ^
States may change their designation of beaches at any time. Therefore, these numbers may change from
year to year.
*Universe for FY 2008 Tier I beaches may be adjusted.
V J
24
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis I ^ I
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-10
^^^•^^^
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining water quality
standards where standards are now fully attained, (cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6
2002-2006 Waters
AJU^ AJUb waters ^ Q ^ J2 241 73
Results
2007 End-of-Year
AJU/ tna or rear 6g 2Q 32Q 26Q 24g 124
(cumulative)
2007 End-of-Year
iwt bna or Year 22 H g6 188 ? 51
(annual)
^UUB commitment 6g ^ 35Q 26Q 30g 124
(cumulative)
2008 Commitment „ c _„ „ „. „
0 5 30 0 61 0
(annual)
2009 Target ?6 84 37Q 36Q 30g ^
(cumulative)
2009 Target (annual) 7 59 20 100 0 11
Universe (2002) 6,710 1,805 8,998 5,274 4,550 1,407
National Program Manager Comments:
PART;
Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9
196 51 8
209 73 38
13 22 30
223 96 46
14 23 8
230 96 56
7 0 10
2,036 1,274 1,041
2012 Target
f
FY 07 data from regional staff and is not reflected in ACS since this measure begins in 2008.
BUD; SMM; SG
Reg 10
6
48
42
50
2
52
2
6,408
2,250
N
F Y 08 targets in the F Y 09 Budget Congressional Justification and PARTWeb are rounded to 1 ,550.
SP-10 differs from previous Measure L, since SP-10 uses an updated 2002 baseline.
Note: 2000-2002 results equal 1,980 waters -not included above.
V
J
Total
924
1,409
485
1,552
143
1,768
216
39,503
25
13
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-11
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Remove the specific causes of waterbody impairment identified by
states in 2002. (cumulative)
BUD
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
2002 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year 120
2008 Commitment 120
2009 Target 132
Universe
42 1,048
100
230
1,125 e
1,200 863 1,700 300
1,354 247
1,700 247
18
236
245
163
163
163
259
134
214
0
n/a
4,033
4,607
5,133
8,826 2,567 13,958 9,374 10,155 3,005 4,391 3,502 2,742 11,157 69,677
2012 Target: 5,600
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 07 data from Regional staff and is not reflected in ACS since measure is new starting in FY 08.
26
Improve Water Quality
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-12
on a Watershed Basis fil
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide
using the watershed approach, (cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5
2002 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year 0 2 0 10 0
2008 Commitment 0 2 3 12 5
2009 Target 4 8 7 16 5
Universe 246 300 300 2,000 378
National Program Manager Comments:
BUD
Reg6 Reg 7 Reg8 Reg9 Reg 10 Total
0
n/a
0 0 9 0 0 21
3 2 11 0 2 40
5 2 13 0 2 62
213 169 684 27 450 4,767
2012 Target: 250
FY 07 data is from Regional staff and is not reflected in ACS since measure begins in FY 08.
27
14
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-13 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Ensure that the condition of the Nation's wadeable streams does not
degrade (i.e. there is no statistically significant increase in the percent of streams rated "poor"
and no statistically significant decrease in the streams rated "good").
2006 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Univsrse
National Commitment
28% good;
25% fair;
42% poor
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
2012 Target: Maintain or improve
The Wadeable Streams Survey will be updated in 2011. There will be no reporting on this measure until 2012.
28
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-14 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Improve water quality in Indian country at monitoring stations in
tribal waters (i.e., show improvement in one or more of seven key parameters: dissolved
oxygen, pH, water temperature, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, pathogen indicators, and
turbidity), (cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7
2006 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe 160(14) 14 (n/a) n/a
PART
g8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
37(2) 729(44) 68(1) 82(4) 100(10) 203(43) 268(67) 1,661(185)*
2012 Target: 50 stations
National Program Manager Comments:
There will be no reporting on this measure until 2012.
*Numbers in parentheses are the number of stations with suspected depressed water quality and restoration
activities underway.
Note: EPA estimates that improvement is most attainable at 185 stations.
29
15
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-15
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: By 2015, in coordination with other federal agencies, reduce by 50
percent the number of homes on tribal lands lacking access to basic sanitation, (cumulative)
2003 Baseline
2005 End-of-Year
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
PART
National Commitment (#) %
26,777 8.4%
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
21,219 6.65%
20,101 6.3%
319,070 100%
2015 Target: 50% (13,389) reduction from
2003 baseline
Beginning in FY 2008, this measure will track the overall efforts of the federal government to provide
wastewater projects to tribal homes. Due to the fact that this is a new measure for FY 2008, using a static
baseline from 2003, data has not been collected for previous years.
30
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 1 ^ 1
Measure #: WQ-1 National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Number of States and Territories that have adopted EPA approved
nutrient criteria into their water quality standards, or are on schedule with a mutually agreed-
upon plan to adopt nutrient criteria into their water quality standards.
(WQ-la) States/Territories that have adopted EPA approved nutrient criteria (cumulative):
2005 End-of-year
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg1
0
0
0
3
6
(WQ-lb) States/territor
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Progr
Reg1
3
3
3
3
3
6
im Man
Reg 2
0
0
0
0
4
Reg 3
2
1
1
1
6
les on schedule to
Reg 2
1
2
1
1
4
4
Reg 3
5
6
5
5
5
6
Reg 4
1
2
2
2
8
Reg5
0
0
1
0
6
Reg 6
1
1
1
1
5
Reg 7
0
0
1
1
4
Reg 8
0
0
0
0
6
Reg 9
1
4
4
4
7
Reg 10
0
0
0
0
4
adopt nutrient criteria (annual):
Reg 4
7
8
8
5
7
8
Reg5
6
6
6
6
5
6
Reg 6
0
4
4
4
4
5
Reg 7
0
3
2
2
3
4
Reg 8
0
3
4
3
3
6
Reg 9
4
7
1
1
1
3
Reg 10
0
3
3
1
0
4
SG
Total
5
n/a
8
10
12
56
SG
Total
26
45
37
31
35
52
iger Comments:
If a state or territory has adopted nutrient water quality standards for some, but not
all of its applicable waters,
it may be counted in both WQ-la and WQ-lb.
31
16
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-2
National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Number of Tribes that have water quality standards approved by EPA.
(cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
0
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
10
10
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 9 Reg 10
3 8
5
5
5
5
16
9
9
9
10
14
Total
26
31
32
33
35
57
National Program Manager Comments:
The universe reflects all federally recognized Tribes who have applied for "treatment in the same manner as a
state" (TAS) to administer the water quality standards program (as of September 2007).
32
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-3 National Office Lead: OST
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of States and Territories and authorized
Tribes that within the preceding three year period, submitted new or revised water quality
criteria acceptable to EPA that reflect new scientific information from EPA or other resources
not considered in the previous standards.
(WQ-3a) States/Territories:
Reg 1 Reg 2
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 3
Reg 4
7
Reg 5
5
Reg 6
4
3
5
5
Reg?
2
2
2
Reg 8 Reg 9
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 10 Total* Total %
38
37
39
38
34
56
68%
66.1%*
66.1%
(WQ-3b) Authorized Tribes:
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5
2005 Baseline n/a n/a n/a 1 1
2006 End-of-Year n/a n/a n/a 2 2
2007 End-of-Year n/a 0 n/a 2 2
2008 Commitment n/a 1 n/a 1 1
2009 Target n/a 1 n/a 2 1
Universe (FY 08) n/a 1 n/a 2 3
Reg 6
5
4
4
5
3
10
Reg?
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 8
2
2
2
2
3
2
Reg 9
0
3
3
2
2
5
Reg 10
3
Total #
12
17
17
15
15
31
71%
57%
National Program Manager Comments:
*FY 05 and 06 end-of-year results are from the WATA database. FY 08 universe for WQ-3b is the number of
authorized tribes that have at least initial EPA approved water quality standards as of September 2007.
33
17
-------
Improve Water Quality
Measure #: WQ-4
Measure Description
on a Watershed Basis I
^^^M
A
1
National Office Lead: OST
: Percent of submissions of new or revised water quality
from States and Territories and from authorized Tribes thai
(WQ-4a) States/Territories
standards
are approved by EPA.*
PART; QMR; BUD; SMM
Reg 1 Reg 2
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year 99.6% 100.0%
2007 End-of-Year 89% 1
2008 Commitment 75%
2009 Target 75%
Universe (FY 07) 2
(WQ-4b) Tribes:
Reg 1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year n/a
2008 Commitment n/a
2009 Target n/a
Universe (FY 07) n/a
00%
87%
83%
1
Reg 2
n/a
70%
n/a
n/a
Reg 3
91.7%
100%
75%
83%
3
Reg 4
83.2%
100%
87%
87%
7
Reg 3 Reg 4
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
100%
n/a
n/a
1
Reg 5
99.8%
100%
80%
80%
6
Reg5
100%
75%
80%
1
Reg 6
86.4%
100%
75%
75%
10
Reg 6
n/a***
75%
75%
0
Reg 7
25.8%
50%
75%
75%
2
Reg 8
95.0%
Reg 9
91.7%
Reg 10
98.0%
Tola
n/a
38.6%
**
89% 78% 50% 85.6% (49)
79%
79%
9
Reg 7 Reg 8
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
100%
79%
79%
2
75%
75%
9
Reg 9
n/a***
50%
50%
0
33%
50%
8
Reg 10
74.1%
76.2%
57
Tola
n/a
n/a
100% 100% (6)
50%
50%
2
66.5%
66. 8°/
6
i
National Program Manager Comments:
f
*Based on submissions received in the 12
N
month period ending April 30 of the fiscal year. Partial approvals
receive fractional credit. **FY 06 end-of-year data is from the WATA database.
Universe changes annually
based on number of water quality standards submissions. ***Regions 6 and 9 received no submissions in the
reporting period for WQ-4b
V
J
34
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-5
ffl
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of States and Territories that have adopted and are
implementing their monitoring strategies in keeping with established schedules.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3
2005 Baseline 636
2006 End-of-Year 646
2007 End-of-Year 646
2008 Commitment 645
2009 Target 646
Universe 646
National Program Manager Comments:
Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7
6634
8654
8654
7654
8654
8654
Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
674
674
574
674
674
674
f
"In keeping with established schedules" means that states include in their annual Section 1 06 Monitoring
SG
Total
51
56
55
54
56
56
\
Initiative workplans specific actions that are intended to implement their monitoring strategies and that states
demonstrate that they are making a good faith effort to do these activities.
V
/
35
18
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
fil
Measure #: WQ-6 National Office Lead: Ow'oW "
Measure Description: Number of Tribes that currently receive funding under Section 106 of the
Clean Water Act that have developed and begun implementing monitoring strategies that are appropriate
to their water quality program consistent with EPA Guidance, and the number that are providing water
quality data in a format accessible for storage in EPA's data system, (cumulative)
(WQ-6a) Tribes implementing monitoring strategies:
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
2005 Baseline 0000000000
2006 End-of-Y ear ----------
2007 End-of-Y ear 0 On/at 4 14 1 11 9 4
2008 Commitment 5 0 n/a 1 24 14 2 4 9 20
2009 Target 6 0 n/a 1 28 14 3 15 35 33
Universe 6 1 n/a 5 32 40 5 23 93 37
(WQ-6b) Tribes providing water quality data:
0
n/a
44
79
135
242
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
2005 Baseline 00 n/a 0020 1 00
2006 End-of-Y ear ----------
2007 End-of-Y ear 1 1 n/a 1 11 7 0 18 3 2
2008 Commitment 5 0 n/a 1 18 7 1 15 3 8
2009 Target 6 1 n/a 1 18 7 1 15 15 14
Universe 6 1 n/a 5 32 40 5 23 93 37
National Program Manager Comments:
*FY05 end-of-y ear data not from ACS.
3*
n/a
44
58
78
242
36
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-7 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of States and Territories that provide electronic information
using the Assessment Database version 2 or later (or compatible system) and geo-reference
the information to facilitate the integrated reporting of assessment data, (cumulative)
2005 End-of-Y ear
2006 End-of-Y ear
2007 End-of-Y ear
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 1
1
4
5
6
6
6
Reg 2
1
3
3
Reg 3
3
6
6
Reg 4
2
5
6
5
5
Reg5
2
5
5
5
5
6
Reg 6
3
4
4
3
2
5
Reg 7
1
1
1
1
2
Reg 8
3
6
6
Reg 9 Reg 10
40
41
42
42
56
National Program Manager Comments:
*FY 05 end-of-year data not from ACS.
37
19
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-8a National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of TMDLs that are established or
approved by EPA [Total TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with national policy.
(WQ-8a) Total TMDLs:
2005 End-ofYear
2006 End-ofYear
2007 End-ofYear
2008 Commitment
2008 Annual Pace
2009 Target
2009 Annual Pace
90
226
5,412
5,469
230
283
PART; QMR; BUD; SMM
Annual Cumulative Annual
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total # Total D
62
495
1,336
1,259
1,091
618
1,098
1,035
1,453
300
420
445
445
445
445
214
155
222
215
664
228
230
210
230
210
379
432
286
357
4,071
4,525
4,191
7,819
3,176
3,891
17,383
22,648
26,844
33,828
n/a
36,941
& of pact
105%
118%
128%
90%
100%
82%
100%
National Program Manager Comments:
ATMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to attain water quality standards. The terms 'approved and 'established
refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself. Annual pace is the number of TMDLs needed to be established consistent
with national policy, i.e. generally within 13 years of listing of the water as impaired. ^Cumulative total commitment numbers are
calculated at about 80% of pace for PART. (Source: Office of Management and Budget, "Detailed Information on the Surface Water
Protection Assessment," available at ). Annual total
numbers are memorialized and static whereas cumulative total PART numbers are open to semi-annual updates.
38
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-8b National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of TMDLs that are established by
States and approved by EPA [State TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with national policy.
(WQ-8b) State TMDLs:
Reg1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-ofYear 90
2007 End-ofYear 226
2008 Commitment 5,412
2008 Annual Pace 5,469
2009 Target 230
2009 Annual Pace 283
Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7
493
145
119
1,061
1,091
613
1,093
1,035
1,453
731
523
220
340
393
380
445
445
445
445
39
138
106
133
178
215
220
141
144
144
161
144
249
211
230
210
230
210
Reg 9 Reg 10
182
172
86
194
43
194
301
376
281
352
PART; BUD; SG
Annual Cumulative Annual %
Total* Total t" of Pace
4,035
3,998
7,676
8,553
3,085
3,825
17,682
21,685
28,527
n/a
31,587
n/a
119%
126%
90%
100%
81%
100%
National Program Manager Comments:
ATMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order to attain water quality standards. The terms 'approved' and 'established
refer to the completion and approval of the TMDL itself. Annual pace is the number of TMDLs needed to be established consistent
with national policy, i.e. generally within 13 years of listing of the water as impaired. ^Cumulative total commitment numbers are
calculated at about 80% of pace for PART. (Source: Office of Management and Budget, "Detailed Information on the Surface Water
Protection Assessment," available at ). Annual total numbers
are memorialized and static whereas cumulative total PART numbers are open to semi-annual updates.
39
20
-------
Measure #: WQ-9
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of nitrogen, phosphorus,
and tons of sediment from nonpoint sources to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
(WQ-9a) Nitrogen: PART; BUD (WQ-9b)Phosphorus: PART; BUD (WQ-9c) Sediment: PART; BUD
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
3.7 million Ibs.
14.5 million Ibs.
19.1 million Ibs.
8.5 million Ibs.
8.5 million Ibs.
n/a
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
558,000 Ibs.
11.8 million Ibs.
7.5 million Ibs.
4.5 million Ibs.
4.5 million Ibs.
n/a
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
1.68 million tons
1.2 million tons
3.9 million tons
700,000 tons
700,000 tons
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 05 baseline for a 6 month period only. Starting with FY 06, a full year of data reported. End-of-Year
results are received mid-February of the following year.
40
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-10
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of waterbodies identified by States (in 1998/2000* or
subsequent years) as being primarily nonpoint source (NFS)-impaired that are partially or fully
restored, (cumulative)
PART; SG
Reg 10 Total
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg1
1
3
9
13
16
Reg 2
0
Reg 3
2
2
6
8
12
Reg 4
5
7
14
23
25
Reg5
2
2
3
10
16
Reg 6
0
1
5
5
6
Reg 7
4
4
9
14
17
Reg 8
0
Reg 9
0
1
2
2
2
14
20"
48
91
114
5,967*
National Program Manager Comments:
Regions report results.
*The universe is the estimated waterbodies impaired primarily by nonpoint sources from the 1998 (or 2000 if
states did not have a 1998 list) 303(d) lists. Note that this universe shifts each time a new 303(d) list is
developed, so this figure is only an estimate. Only waters on the Success Story website
( ) are counted.
**Regional FY 06 end-of-year results not from ACS. Only a national FY 06 end-of-year result shown in
ACS. Indicator measure in F Y 06.
41
21
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-11
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of follow-up actions that are completed
by assessed NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) programs, (cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
(cumulative)
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
15
22
5
12
16
4
13
17
15
20
23
28
Reg 9
1
National Program Manager Comments:
Reg 10
2
13
Total #
54
137
19 184
Indicator
Indicator
32 298
47.2%*
62%
Indicator
Indicator
100%
Regional annual commitments and action items are confirmed by HQ action item database.
*FY 05 and FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS. (F Y 07 measure slightly different than FY 05 and F Y 06
measures.)
Assessed programs include 45 authorized states, 5 unauthorized states (MA, NH, NM, AK, ID), 1 authorized
territory (VI), 3 authorized territories (DC, PR, Pacific Island Territories), and 10 Regions (total of 64
programs) assessed through the Permits for Environmental Results (PER) program.
Universe of 298 includes all follow-up actions for which a schedule was established. The universe increases
as additional action items are identified by the Regions and through HQ program review. An updated
universe will be available in March 2009.
42
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-12
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Percent of facilities covered by NPDES permits that are considered current, and
of those, the percent of tribal facilities covered.
fWQ-12al Non-tribal facilities covered bv NPDES permits that are current:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
Reg 1
64%
70.0%
1,092
76%
1,360
73%
1,132
76%
1,357
1,786
Reg 2 Reg 3** " Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8
87.7%
2,995
89%
3,054
87%
2,979
82.6%
17,460
89%
16,449
86%
13,325
89%
16,407
18,435
94.1%
19,072
95%
17,916
90%
18,231
90%
18,230
20,256
74.6%
10,220
82%
11,770
91%
12,660
90%
12,777
14,196
95.2%
24,444
90%
24,082
24,073
26,748
83.6%
7,289
90%
14,877
81%
7,050
87%
14,416
16,570
85.5%
4,198
82%
3,833
85%
4,154
85%
4,124
4,852
Reg 9
91%
82.0%
2,448
83%
2,281
81%
2,237
80%
2,209
2,761
Reg 10
77%
79.0%
5,052
79%
4,663
80%
4,681
75%
4,388
5,850
Total #
96,851
100,977
114,898
SG
Total %
(WQ-12b) Tribal facilities covered by permits that are current:
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3" Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
0 2
(2)100% (2)100%
2(100%) 2(100%)
2(100%) 2(100%)
100% (2) 100% (2)
8
16 37
(15)100% (37)90.2% (10)90%
13 (100%) 41 (93%)
13(100%) 40(93%)
100% (13) 95% (42)
Reg?
1
(10)62.5%
10(100%) 16(100%)
9(90%) 16(100%)
90% (9) 100% (16)
13
44
10
Reg 8
140
(173)93.5%
188 (97%)
186(96%)
90% (178)
198
Reg 9
Reg 1 0
41 16
(31)77% (16)27.6%
34 (71 %) 15 (27%)
32 (80%) 47 (80%)
76% (38) 80% (47)
50
59
QMR
Total # Total %
347
347
394
National Program Manager Comments:
Targets, commitments, and results will be reported in both percent and number. This measure includes
facilities covered by all permits, including State and EPA issued permits. Due to the shifting universe of
permitees, its is important to focus on the national percent. *FY 05 data not from ACS. **(WQ-12a) Region 3
universe & FY 06 result are updated to reflect data reconciliation during migration from PCS to ICIS.
***(WQ-12b) FY 07 Region 8 commitment adjusted due to counting error. Universe for WQ-12a is based on 43
VFY2008Q1 data pull. }
22
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-13a & b National Office Lead
[A~|
: OWM
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of facilities covered under either an
individual or general permit by type: a) MS-4s and b) industrial storm water.
(WQ-13a)MS-4s: SG; I
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total #
2005 Baseline n/a
2006 End-of-Year n/a
2007 End-of-Year 518 1,079 994 755 1,813 213 257 254 583 166 6,632
2008 Commitment Indicator
2009 Target Indicator
Universe n/a
(WQ-13b) Industrial storm water:
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year 1,654 4,646 6,071 18,323 20,508 11,468 5,221 4,990 11,222 2,723
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
SG;I
Total # Total %
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
86,826 n/a
ndicator Indicator
ndicator Indicator
n/a 100%
Data did not exist prior to 2007 for WQ-13 a & b.
44
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis I ^ I
Measure #: WQ-13c & d National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number of facilities covered under either an individual or general
permit by type: c) construction storm water sites and d) CAFOs.
(WQ-13c) Construction storm water sites:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 1 Reg 2
4,321 8,521
Reg 3
15,671
Reg 4
75,317
Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
44,846 28,360 17,661 10,504 32,609 4,991
(WQ-13d) CAFOs:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Progr
Reg 1 Reg 2
0 624
4 625
1 610
33 632
Reg 3
175
153
208
770
Reg 4
2,131
2,126
2,126
3,621
Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
1,488 1,391 1,239 448 296 831
1,577 906 1,325 414 269 737
1,792 938 1,399 550 267 838
2,523 4,190 3,777 841 1,670 915
SG;I
Total
n/a
n/a
242,801
ndicator
ndicator
n/a
SG;I
Total
8,623*
8,136
8,729
ndicator
ndicator
18,972
im Manager Comments:
(Data did not exist prior to 2007 for WQ- 1 3c .
*FY05 CAFO data is not from ACS. Note: It is likely the
Regions overestimated the number of CAFOs covered by a general permit in 2005 .
45
23
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-14 National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of (a) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) in
POTWs with Pretreatment Programs that have control mechanisms in place that implement applicable
pretreatment requirements; and, (b) Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs) in non-pretreatment POTWs that
have control mechanisms in place that implement applicable pretreatment requirements.
(WQ-14a) SIUs:
SG
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total #
1,589 1,882 1,790 3,932 4,899 2,132 829 592 4,019 562 22,226
94% 99% 99% 100% 99.8% 99.4% 99.9% 99% 95% 100%
1,411 1,869 1,792 3,871 5,265 2,005 1,024 697 4,019 649 22,602
1,363 2,110 1,723 3,418 5,265 2,096 1,021 686 3,808 572 22,062
1,367 1,850 1,774 3,289 5,265 2,081 974 690 4,087 572 21,949
1,347 1,850 1,710 3,289 5,265 1,998 1,005 690 4,087 572 21,813
94% 98% 98% 97% 99% 95% 98% 98% 97% 100%
1,428 1,888 1,744 3,391 5,273 2,096 1,025 704 4,214 572 22,335
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
44 117 74 31 458 17 31 45 0 198
100% (44) 100% (71) 100% (75) 100% (321) 97% (687) 88% (95) 78% (190) 74% (31) 100% (6) 100% (48)
(WQ-14b) CIUs:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
I
Total # Total %
1,015 91.2%*
1,568 94%
1,547 94%
Indicator Indicator
Indicator
1,650
Indicator
100%
:*FY 05 and FY 06 data shown as percents in ACS; facility numbers are approximate. Region 4 universe now
includes AL and MS CIUs which are permitted by the states. Baseline is the known percentage of those CIUs
that are 'controlled' in some way, shape, or form. All universe numbers are approximate as they shift from
year to year.
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis I A I
Measure #: WQ-15 National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Percent of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC)
at any time during the fiscal year, and of those, the number, and national percent,
discharging pollutant(s) of concern on impaired waters.
(WQ-15a) Percent of Major Dischargers in SNC:
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (2006)
Reg 1
25.0%
42%
39.8%
426
Reg 2 Reg 3
28.7% 15.0%
28% 16%
29.0% 16.7%
582 757
(WQ-15b) Number of Major Discharg
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe**
Reg1
56
155 (89)
Reg 2 Reg 3
27 28
67 (34) 256 (145
Reg 4
20.7%
22%
22.0%
1,345
ers on Ini]
Reg 4
42
Reg5
17.7%
20%
18.4%
1,167
Reg 6
23.7%
22%
23.9%
1,087
laired Waters i
Reg5
90
147 (75) 773 (471) 1
Reg 6
29
J9 (136)
Reg?
17.7%
32%
31.7%
396
nSNC:
Reg?
15
81 (46)
Reg 8
8.0%
5%
7.8%
260
Reg 8
3
43 (29)
Reg 9
13.7%
17%
16.5%
347
Reg 9
12
12 (10)
PART; BUD; SG
Reg 10
15.3%
16%
21 .5%
276
Reg 10
4
12 (6)
Total %
19.7%
22.2%*
22.6%
< 22.5%
< 22.5%
100%
Total %
TBD
n/a
n/a
Indicator
Indicator
100% 1
Total #
1 ,308*
1 ,473*
n/a
n/a
n/a
6,643
I
Total #
TBD
308*
n/a
Indicator
Indicator
735(1,041)
National Program Manager Comments:
1HQ reports results by Region. FY 08 commitment for WQ
15aof <22.5%is
a 3 yr. average that shows overall trends.
*FY06
1
end-of-year data not from ACS. **The universe for WQ-15b represents the number of major facilities on impaired waterbodies; |
in parentheses are the number of major facilities on impaired waterbodies potentially discharging the impairing pollutant.
J47
24
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-16
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of all major publicly-owned treatment
works (POTWs) that comply with their permitted wastewater discharge standards
(i.e. POTWs that are not in significant non-compliance).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
PART; BUD
National Commitment (#) %
3,670 86.6%
3,645* 86%
3,650 86%
3,645 86%
4,256 86%
4,238 100%
National Program Manager Comments:
*FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS.
48
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-17
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Fund utilization rate [cumulative loan agreement dollars to the
cumulative funds available for projects] for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (2007) (in
$ billions)*
Reg1
110%
102%
104%
Reg 2
92%
93%
Reg 3
89%
94%
94%
92%
94%
$5.3
Reg 4
95%
97%
100%
89%
92%
$7.5
Reg5
92%
95%
Reg 6
91%
92%
$6.1
Reg 7
88%
Reg 8
91%
91%
93%
91%
Reg 9
93%
95%
101%
92%
92%
$5.2
PART; BUD
Reg 10
104%
106%
95%
95%
$2.0
Total
94.7%
94.7%
96.7%
93.5%
93.7%
$65.1
National Program Manager Comments:
*Universe represents the funds available for projects for the CWSRF through 2007, in billions of dollars (i.e., the
denominator of the measure).
49
25
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-19a
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of high priority state NPDES permits that are
issued as scheduled.
PART; QMR; BUD; SMM; SG
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
FY 2009 Universe
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7
9 22 21 91 265 125 32
21 33 50 66 130 95 62
5 (71%) 39 (115%) 29 (121%) 72 (144%) 108 (123%) 63 (95%) 92 (94%)
1 22 20 54 61 48 75
Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
22 3 11
52 8 29
42 (117%) 22 (122%) 12 (92%)
27 29 12
17(94%) 21(95%) 91(95%) 63(95%) 52(95%) 50(94%) 117(95%) 37(95%) 21(95%) 20(95%)
Total #
601
546
484
349
489
515
National Program Manager Comments:
CURRENT: Target measure (based on national performance). FY 2009 targets and commitments are fixed at 95% prior to a
universe that will be determined in January 2009.
PROPOSED for FY 2010: Number of high priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year. In FY 2010, the
measure will be revised to provide a universe of priority permits in time for the setting of national and regional targets in
early 2009, draft commitments in July 2009, and final commitments in September 2009, consistent with the Agency target
and commitment schedule. Regions will commit to issue a certain number of permits from the fixed universe of priority
permits inFY 2010. The national target will be the sum of all Regional commitments. There will be no percentage goal for
this measure. The universe of priority permits will be updated annually.
BACKGROUND: HQ reports results by Region. WQ-19a conforms to 106 PART measure. FY 2006 measure, formed prior
to PART, reported in 2 parts (non-tribal and tribal). FY 2006 results: 98.5% (non-tribal) & 63.2% (tribal). FY 2007 measure
reported in 3 parts (State issued, EPA non-tribal, and EPA tribal permits). *FY 2007 Regional commitments & results are not
from ACS. **The revised FY 2008 universe/commitments, including a numerical national commitment, will be reported at
mid FY 2008. Starting in FY 2008, the universe of priority permits candidates is expanded to capture a larger universe of
.environmentally significant permits.
Total %
104%
97%
112%
/SO
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-19b
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number, and national percent, of high priority state and EPA (including tribal)
NPDES permits, that are issued as scheduled.
BUD
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
FY 2009 Universe
Reg 1 Reg 2
16 9
4 25
8(114%) 20(125%)
7 13
Reg 3
0
0
Reg 4
0
1 (100%)
2
Reg 5
0
0
Reg 6 Reg 7
1 8
6 3
3(150%) 5(100%)
0 0
Reg 8
6
5
5 (83%)
2
Reg 9
0
0
Reg 10
19
24
0(0%) 25(104%)
25(96%) 35(95%) 95(95%) 63(95%) 60(95%) 58(95%) 117(95%) 37(95%) 26(93%) 73(95%)
Total #
59
68
63
115
589
620
117%
100%*
National Program Manager Comments:
/CURRENT: Target measure (based on national performance). FY 2009 targets and commitments are fixed at 95% prior to a N
universe that will be determined in January 2009.
PROPOSED for FY 2010: Number of high priority state & EPA (including tribal) NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal
year. InFY 2010, the measure will be revised to provide a universe of priority permits in time for the setting of national and
regional targets in early 2009, draft commitments in July 2009, and final commitments in September 2009, consistent with the
Agency target and commitment schedule. Regions will commit to issue a certain number of permits from the fixed universe of
priority permits inFY 2010. The national target will be the sum of all Regional commitments. There will be no percentage
goal for this measure. The universe of priority permits will be updated annually.
BACKGROUND: HQ reports results by Region. WQ-19a conforms to Surface Water Protection PART measure. FY 2006
measure, formed prior to PART, reported in 2 parts (non-tribal and tribal). FY 2006 results: 98.5% (non-tribal) & 63.2%
(tribal). FY 2007 measure reported in 3 parts (State issued, EPA non-tribal, and EPA tribal permits). *FY 2007 Regional
commitments & results are not from ACS. **The revised FY 2008 universe/commitments, including a numerical national
commitment, will be reported at mid FY 2008. Starting in FY 2008, the universe of priority permits candidates is expanded to
capture a larger universe of environmentally significant permits. Starting inFY 2009, WQ-19b will measure the sum of all
priority permits (State issued and EPA issued including Tribal). '
/51
26
-------
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-20
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number of facilities that have traded at least once plus all facilities
covered by an overlay permit* that incorporates trading provisions with an enforceable cap.
Reg 1
79
80
80
Reg 2
0
1
1
Reg 3
1
1
1
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (2007)
National Program Manager Comments:
Reg 4
8
30
30
Reg5
3
4
7
Reg 7
0
0
0
Reg 8
0
0
2
Reg 10
1
1
1
SG;I
Total
98"
121"
127"*
Indicator
Indicator
365
Note: WQ-20 was a two part measure in F Y 07; (a) was a Target measure until early FY 07, and has
subsequently been dropped. Universe is the number of dischargers covered under an NPDES permit that
allows trading. **FY 05 and FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS. In FY 06, measure language read
"Number of dischargers with permits provided for trading... and the number of dischargers that carried out
trades." In FY 07, measure was: "Number of permits providing for trading.... and the number of
dischargers that carried out trades." ***F Y 07 end-of-year results are based on the number of dischargers
that carried out trades and are not from ACS.
*The trading measure counts all point source permitted facilities that have traded at least once using either
individual or general permits that allow trading. Facilities covered under an overlay permit (sometimes
i called an 'aggregate,' 'watershed,' 'bubble,' or 'umbrella' permit) that set an enforceable cap on specific ,
\Dollutant discharges are all automatically counted as having traded. J
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Measure #: WQ-21
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of water segments identified as impaired in 2002 for which
States and EPA agree that initial restoration planning is complete (i.e., EPA has approved all
needed TMDLs for pollutants causing impairments to the waterbody or has approved a 303(d)
list that recognizes that the waterbody is covered by a Watershed Plan [i.e., Category 4b or
Category 5m]). (cumulative)
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe (2002)
336
529
6,710
332
332
1,805
1,229*
1,313
8,998
1,243
1,322
407
506
131
263
1,463
1,637
5,274 4,550 1,407* 2,036
200
200
1,274
47
47
1,041
576
643
6,408
n/a
5,964*
6,792
Indicator
Indicator
39,503*
National Program Manager Comments:
For F Y 2009, geo-referencing data will be requested for reported segments.
Universe consists of waters identified as impaired in state submission in 2002. * Adjustments made to Region
3 FY 06 end-year result and to Region 6 universe.
53
27
-------
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: Subobjective 2.2.2
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Prevent water pollution and protect coastal and ocean systems to
improve national and regional coastal aquatic system health on the "good/fair/poor" scale of
the National Coastal Condition Report.
2004 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
PART
National Commitment
2.3
2.7
2.8
2.4
2.4
5
2011 Target: 2.5
National Program Manager Comments:
Rating consists of a 5-point system where 1 is poor and 5 is good.
54
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: Strategic Targets (SP-16 to SP-19) National Office Lead:
Measure Description: Maintain aquatic ecosystem health on the "good/fair/poor"
the National Coastal Condition Report in the following Regions:
(SP-16) Northeast: (SP-17) Southeast:
m
OWOW
scale of
National Commitment National Commitment
2004 Baseline 1.8 2004 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year n/a 2006 End-°f-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year 1.8* 2008 Commitment
2008 Commitment 1.8 2009 Target
2009 Target 1.8 Universe
3.8
n/a
3.8*
3.8
3.8
5
2011 Target: Maintain baseline 2011 Target: Maintain baseline
(SP-18) West Coast: (SP-19) Puerto Rico:
National Commitment National Commitment
2004 Baseline 2 2004 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year n/a 2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year 2* 2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment 2 2008 Commitment
2009 Target 2 2009 Target
Universe 5 Universe
1.7
n/a
1.7*
1.7
1.7
5
2011 Target: Maintain baseline 2011 Target: Maintain baseline
National Program Manager Comments:
*FY 07 end-of-year data not from ACS. (For Gulf of Mexico, see Subobjective 4.3.5)
55
28
-------
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-20
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will have
achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan
and measured through on-site monitoring programs).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
Reg 1
5
5
100%
100%
5
Reg 2
3
3
100%
100%
3
Reg 3
2
3
100%
100%
2
Reg 4
17
13
90%
90%
19
Reg 5
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 6
15
100%
14
Reg?
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 8
n/a
Reg 9
11
11
100%
100%
11
Reg 10 Total #
100%
100%
9
BUD
Total %
94%
n/a
84.8%
95.4%
98%
100%
2011 Target: 95%
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 07 end-of-year data is shown numerically in ACS. Indicator measure in FY 07.
56
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: Subobjective 4.3.2 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Working with partners, protect or restore additional acres of habitat
within the study areas for the 28 estuaries that are part of the National Estuary Program
(NEP).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Unhverse
Reg 1
14,562
7,495
9,269
975
3,321
Reg 2
15,009
2,831
1,814
1,025
1,115
Reg 3
33,793
4,122
8,349
3,000
5,000
Reg 4
232,605
108,791
60,963
25,000
30,000
Reg5
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
PART; BUD; SMM
Annual Cumulati\«
Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 total total
54,378 n/a n/a 82,363 16,531 _ 449,2421
8,021 n/a n/a 11,292 2,900 145,451
11,484 n/a n/a 6,090 4,493 102,462
3,000 n/a n/a 5,114 5,000 43,114
3,000 n/a n/a 5,200 2,802 75,000
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: an additional 250,000 acres
(cumulative measuring from 2007 forward)
Note: This measure is under Goal 4 in the 2006-2011 Strategic Plan.
*F Y 05 end-of-year regional data is not from ACS.
57
29
-------
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: CO-1
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of coastal waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining
water quality standards where standards are now fully attained.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
2005 Baseline n/a
2006 End-of-Year n/a
2007 End-of-Year 0 0 0 0 n/a 0 n/a n/a 0 0 0
2008 Commitment Indicator
2009 Target Indicator
Universe 2,389 742 1,796 1,285 n/a 346 n/a n/a 474 1,226 8,258
National Program Manager Comments:
Universe represents the number of impaired waters in coastal HUCs (hydrologic unit codes) reported by coastal
States in 2002.
Measure revised for FY 09.
58
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: CO-2
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Total coastal and non-coastal acres protected from vessel sewage by
"no discharge zone(s)." (cumulative)
Reg 1
2005 Baseline 334.7
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year 976
2009 Target
Universe 2,788.9
Reg 2
276
276
1,406.5
Reg 3
37
80.1
2,440.4
Reg 4 Reg 5
120.8 2,605.8
Reg 6
0
120.8 2,605.8 0
5,332 3,298.9 3,291.7
Reg 7
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 8
n/a
Reg 9
65.1
Reg 10
0
65.1 0
1,616.5 1,843.1
Total
3,439.4
n/a
4,123.8
Indicator
22,018
National Program Manager Comments:
This is the first reporting year in which both inland and coastal no discharge zones (NDZs) will be tracked. In
addition, NDZs will be measured in area, not coastline miles. As a result, the "universe" will consist of the total
area of water eligible to be designated as a NDZ under the current regulations.
Measure revised for FY 09.
59
30
-------
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: CO-3
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of National Estuary Program priority actions in
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs) that have been completed.
(cumulative)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg1
135
150
159
Reg 2
11
17
Reg 3
0
3
1
Reg 4
9
44
37
Reg5
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 6
13
26
31
Reg 7
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 9
46
92
Reg 10
11
11
269
I
Total
225
343
557
Indicator
Indicator
2,038
National Program Manager Comments:
60
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Measure #: CO-4 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Rate of return on Federal investment for the National Estuary
Programs [dollar value of "primary" leveraged resources (cash or in-kind) divided by
320 funds].
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
2005 Baseline $12.3 $46.9 $7.7 $19.1 n/a $4.5 n/a n/a $51.0 $17.3
2006 End-of-Year $34.8 $166.9 $6.4 $428.6 n/a $19.5 n/a n/a $62.7 $46.7
2007 End-of-Year $53.6 $2.8 $4.5 $114.7 n/a $11.2 n/a n/a $10.3 $11.0
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
[ (Dollars in millions and rounded to nearest tenth of a percent).
Section
i
Total
$158.8
$765.6
$208.1
Indicator
Indicator
n/a
A
Note that "primary" leveraged dollars are those the National Estuary Program (NEP) played the central role in
obtaining. An example of primary leveraged dollars would be those obtained from a successful grant proposal
written by the NEP.
I FY 06 end-of-year data is not from ACS.
J
61
31
-------
Improve Coastal and Ocean
Measure #: CO-5
n
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of dredged material management plans that are in place for
major ports and harbors.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6
2005 Baseline 2120 3
2006 End-of-Year 8152 6
2007 End-of-Year 8152 6
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe 10 3 8 18 28 14
National Program Manager Comments:
i
Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
n/a n/a 2 5 15
n/a n/a 2 2 26
n/a n/a 2 6 30
Indicator
Indicator
n/a n/a 12 11 104*
f ~\
*This number represents major coastal/Great Lakes ports/harbors (commercially significant/deep draft and
regionally significant). Development of a dredged material management plan is not necessary or feasible for all
ports and harbors in the universe.
V J
62
Measure #: CO-6
Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that are
monitored in the reporting year.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 1
2
2
5
Reg 2
1
3
3
Reg 3
2
2
3
Reg 4
0
5
5
Reg 5
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 7
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Reg 9
2
3
3
I
Total
15
26
33
Indicator
Indicator
61
National Program Manager Comments:
63
32
-------
Increase Wetlands
Measure #: Subobjective SP-21 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Working with partners, achieve a net increase of acres of wetlands
per year with additional focus on biological and functional measures and assessment of
wetland condition.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-22 National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states and
tribes, achieve "no net loss" of wetlands each year under the Clean Water Act Section 404
regulatory program.
SP-21
National Commitment
(Annual)
32,000*
32,000
32,000
100,000
100,000
n/a
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
2011 Target: 400,000 cumulative
BUD
(Cumulative)
64,000"
96,000
400,000
500,000
n/a
SP-22
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
n/a
Data available 1/08
Data available 1/08
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
n/a
2011 Target: No Net Loss
National Program Manager Comments:
Data source: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Wetland Status and Trends Report.
*F Y 05 end-of-year data not from ACS.
**FY 06 result (estimated 64,000 acres) fell short based on simple extrapolation of most recent annual rate
('98-'04). The next Status and Trends Report (2011) should show a continuation of upward trends.
64
Increase Wetlands
Measure #: WT-1
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of wetland acres restored and improved, under the
President's 2004 Earth Day Initiative, (cumulative)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
n/a
58,777
61,856
75,000*
88,000
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
These acres may include those supported by Wetland 5 Star Restoration Grants, National Estuary Program,
Section 319 grants, Brownfields grants, or EPA's Great Waterbodies Program.
*FY 08 Commitment represents a cumulative total. Unexpected accomplishments in FY 06, particularly in
the National Estuary Program, contributed significantly to the total number of wetland acres restored and
enhanced.
65
33
-------
Increase Wetlands i^fcl
1 Til
Measure #:
WT-2
Measure Description
l^_^_l
National Office Lead: OWOW
Number of States and Tribes that have built
monitoring, regulation, restoration, water quality
standards,
capacities
mitigation
in wetland
compliance, and
partnership building.
(WT-2a) States
2005 Baseline*
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
(WT-2b) Tribes
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg 1
6
6
6
6
Reg1
0
0
9
Reg 2
0
1
0
2
Reg 2
1
0
7
Reg 3
3
5
5
5
Reg 3
n/a
n/a
0
Reg 4
7
7
8
8
Reg 4
1
0
6
Reg 5
0
0
1
6
Reg5
0
3
36
Reg 6
0
0
1
5
Reg 6
0
0
68
Reg 7 F
1
0
1
4
Reg 7 F
0
1
9
eg
3
2
0
6
eg
3
0
27
8 Reg
0
0
1
4
8 Reg
0
2
146
3 Reg 10
0
0
2
4
1 Reg 10
0
5
271
I
Total
20
21
25
ndicator
ndicator
50
I
Total
n/a
5
11
ndicator
ndicator
579
National Program Manager Comments:
Substantial progress to be shown in three of the six areas identified during the last 3 years (i.e. monitoring,
regulation, restoration, water qual
ty stand
irds, mitigation compliance, and partnership building). *
a true baseline since this measure is evaluated annually and is more akin to a rate than
V
This is not
a cumulative measure.
66
Increase Wetlands
Measure #: WT-3
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Percent of Clean Water Act Section 404 standard permits, upon which EPA
coordinated with the permitting authority (i.e., Corps or State), where a final permit decision in FY 08
documents requirements for greater environmental protection* than originally proposed.
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
2005 End-of-Year
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
National Program Manager Comments:
New starting in FY 08. Reported on by Regions and HQ. ** FY 07 end-of-year data not available till June 2008.
""'Requirements for greater environmental protection" are counted under this measure when EPA can document that its
recommendations for improvement provided in one or more of the following issue areas were incorporated into the final
permit decision:
1. Demonstration of adequate impact avoidance, including:
a) Determination of water dependency; b) Characterization of basic project purpose; c) Determination of
range of practicable alternatives; d) Evaluation of direct, secondary and cumulative impacts for practicable
alternatives; e) Identification of Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative; f) Compliance with
WQS, MPRSA, ESA and/or toxic effluent standards; g) Evaluation of potential for significant degradation.
2. Demonstration of adequate impact minimization
3. Determination of adequate compensation
Note: The documented permit decision can be in the form of an issued, withdrawn, or denied permit. The universe is the
number of individual permits where EPA has the opportunity to comment (approximately 20,000/year). Regional priorities
dictate the specific permits for which EPA submits comments. This number is typically less than 20,000.
Indicator
Indicator
n/a
'67
34
-------
Increase Wetlands
Measure #: WT-4
National Office Lead: OWOW
Measure Description: Number of states measuring baseline wetland condition - with plans
to assess trends in wetland condition - as defined through condition indicators and
assessments, (cumulative)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 Commitment
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Reg1
1
1
Reg 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
Reg3
4
5
5
5
3
4
5
Reg 4
1
2
1
1
1
1
Reg5
1
0
0
0
Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10 Total
11
15
14
12
13
19
50
National Program Manager Comments:
By 2013, a state will document within an Integrated Water Quality Monitoring Report (IMR) the baseline
condition of at least one wetland type for the entire state or all wetlands in one major river basin. States
may use either Level 1, 2, or 3 methods or the combined 3-Level approach. The state also has plans to re-
survey for the purposes of evaluating trends. To maximize financial resources, states are encouraged to use a
probability survey design for measuring baseline condition.
Regions should coordinate with EPA HQ and reference the full definition for this measure to make a
determination on whether a state is "on track" to meet this measure by 2013.
Measure revised for F Y 09.
68
Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-23
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Reduce the number of currently exceeded water quality standards in
impaired transboundary segments of U.S. surface waters.
2002 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
PART
Region 6 Region 9 National Commitment
17
n/a
0
0
n/a
n/a
2012 Target: Achieve a majority of
the 2002 baseline (i.e., 9)
FY 2009 target is deferred, pending reassessment of the measure. Cumulative starting in FY 07, this measure
refers to a reduction in the number of currently exceeded water quality standards in impaired transboundary
segments of U.S. surface waters (measure description revision to be made in FY 09).
Indicator measure in FY 07.
69
35
-------
Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-24
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the
U.S.-Mexico Border area that lacked access to safe drinking water in 2003.
2003 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
PART; QMR; BUD
Regions Region 9 National Commitment
98,515
22,458*
1,276
2,500
1,500 0 1,500
n/a
2012 Target: 24,628 (25% of 2003 Baseline)
National Program Manager Comments:
Measure is regionally reported starting in FY 09.
2003 Baseline: 98,515 homes in the Mexico Border area lacking access to safe drinking water.
*FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS. Indicator measure in F Y 07.
70
Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-25
National Office Lead: OWM
Measure Description: Number of additional homes provided adequate wastewater sanitation
in the U.S.-Mexico Border area that lacked access to wastewater sanitation in 2003.
2003 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Uni\«rse
PART; QMR; BUD
Region 6 Region 9 National Commitment
690,723
30,195*
73,475
15,000
100,000 5,500 105,500
n/a
2012 Target: 172,680 (25% of 2003 Baseline)
National Program Manager Comments:
Measure is regionally reported starting in F Y 09.
2003 Baseline: 690,723 homes in the Mexico border area lacking access to wastewater sanitation.
*FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS. Indicator measure in FY 07.
71
36
-------
Sustain and Restore Pacific Island Territories
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-26
National Office Lead: Region 9
Measure Description: Percent of the population in each of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories
served by community drinking water systems that receive continuous drinking water that
meets all applicable health-based drinking water standards.
2OO5 Baseline
2OO6 End-of-Year
2OO7 End-of-Year
2OO8 Commitment
2OO9 Target
Uni\«rse
National Program Manager Comments:
BUD
National Commitment
95% of American Samoa;
1O% of the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands;
8O% of Guam
n/a
n/a
69%
72%
n/a
2011 Target: 95%
New measure starting
inFYOS.
72
Sustain and Restore Pacific Island Territories
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-27
National Office Lead: Region 9
Measure Description: Percent of the time that the sewage treatment plants in the U.S.
Pacific Island Territories comply with permit limits for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
and total suspended solids (TSS).
BUD
National Commitment
59%
34%*
n/a
62%
64%
n/a
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: 90%
New measure starting in FY 08.
*FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS.
73
37
-------
Sustain and Restore Pacific Island Territories
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-28
National Office Lead: Region 9
Measure Description: Percent of days of the beach season that beaches in each of the U.S.
Pacific Island Territories monitored under the Beach Safety Program will be open and safe for
swimming.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
84%
81%*
n/a
85%
86%
n/a
2011 Target: 96°/
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure starting in FY 08.
*FY 06 end-of-year data not from ACS.
74
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: Subobjective 4.3.3
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Improve the overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by preventing
water pollution and protecting aquatic ecosystems.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-29
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Average annual percentage decline for the long-term trend in
concentrations of PCBs in whole lake trout and walleye samples.
4.3.3
2OO5 Baseline
2OO6 End-of-Year
2OO7 End-of-Year
2OO8 Commitment
2OO9 Target
Universe
2011 Target: 23
National Program Manager Comments:
PART
National Commitment
21.5 points
21.1 points
22.7 points
22 points
22.5 points
4O points
SP-29
199O Baseline
2OO6 End-of-Year
2OO7 End-of-Year
2OO8 Commitment
2OO9 Target
Universe
PART; BUD
National Commitment
(*see below)
6%
6%
5%
5%
n/a
2011 Target: 5%
»
Subobjective 4.3.3 provides a general indication of progress of numerous state and federal programs, with a specific focus
on coastal wetlands, phosphorus concentrations, AOC sediment contamination, benthic health, fish tissue contamination,
beach closures, drinking water quality, and air toxics deposition.
SP-29 indicates that PCBs in top predator fish (generally lake trout, but walleye in Lake Erie) at monitored sites is
expected to continue an average annual decrease of 5%. A 2-year lag between measurement and reporting means that the
FY 09 target pertains to measurements made in 2007. *1990 baseline: Concentrations levels at stations in Lakes Superior
[0.45 ppm], Michigan [2.72 ppm], Huron [1.5 ppm], Erie [1.35ppm], & Ontario [2.18 ppm].
38
-------
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-30
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Average annual percentage decline for the long-term trend in
concentrations of toxic chemicals (PCBs) in the air in the Great Lakes basin.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-31
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Number of Areas of Concern (AOCs) in the Great Lakes basin which
are restored and de-listed, (cumulative)
SP-30 PART; BUD
National Commitment
1990 Baseline (*see below)
2006 End-of-Year 8%
2007 End-of-Year 8%
2008 Commitment 7%
2009 Target 7%
Universe n/a
2011 Target: 7% decline
National Program Manager Comments:
SP-31
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
PART
National Commitment
0
1
1
3
3
31
2010 Target: 8 AOCs restored
SP-30 indicates that concentrations are expected to continue decreasing an average annual 7%. A 2-year lag
between measurement and reporting means that the F Y 09 target pertains to measurements made in 2007.
*1992 Concentrations were: L. Superior [100 pg/m3], L. Michigan [289 pg/m3], L. Erie [431 pg/m3].
SP-31 identifies a cumulative target of delisting 3 of the original 31 US or binational Areas of Concern. Only
1 AOC (in New York) has been de-listed to date.
76
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-32
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Cubic yards of contaminated sediments remediated (cumulative) in the
Great Lakes.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
PART; BUD
National Commitment
3.7 million
4.1 million
4.5 million
5 million
5.5 million
46 million
2011 Target: 7 million
*FY 06 end-of-year result shown annually in ACS.
Universe identifies quantity of contaminated sediment estimated to require remediation as of 1997. This
total has been revised from a previous estimate of 75 million cubic yards based on state-submitted
information and subsequent decisions, information verification, and actual remediations. Information lags
behind (i.e. the 2007 commitment is for calendar year 2006 sediment remediation).
77
39
-------
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: GL-1
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Number, and percent of all NPDES permitted discharges to the Lakes
or major tributaries that have permit limits that reflect the Guidance's water quality standards,
where applicable.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Region 2 Region 3 Region 5 Total # Total '
1,196(93%) 33(100%)
1,196(93%) 33(100%)
1,186(93%) 33(100%)
1,186(93%) 33(100%)
1,186(93%)
1,275
33(100%)
33
1,654(91%)
1,630(92%)
1,671 (96%)
1,714(98%)
1,735(98%)
1,770
2,883
2,859
2,890
2,933
2,954
3,078
91.9%*
93%
94.8%
96%
96%
100%
National Program Manager Comments:
*2005 Baseline has been adjusted to include updated Regional information.
Universe for this measure changes with current information. FY 07 universe equals 3,048 and FY 08
universe was 3,057.
This measure is the Great Lakes subset of measure SS-1, and now includes consistent methods by the three
Regions.
78
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: GL-2
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Number, and Great Lakes percent, using a constant denominator, of
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) permits with a schedule incorporated into an appropriate enforceable
mechanism, including a permit or enforcement order, with specific dates and milestones, including a
completion date consistent with Agency guidance, which requires 1) Implementation of a Long Term
Control Plan (LTCP) which will result in compliance with the technology and water quality-based
requirements of the Clean Water Act; or 2) implementation of any other acceptable CSO control
measures consistent with the 1994 CSO Control Policy; or 3) completion of separation after the
baseline date, (cumulative)
Region 2 Region 3 Region 5 Total # Total %
2002 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
11
15(56%)
19(73%)
21 (81%)
23 (88%)
26
1
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
1
117
79 (65%)
100(81%)
93 (75%)
112 (90%)
124
129
95
120
115
136
151
85%
63%
79%
76%
90%
100%
National Program Manager Comments:
Universe for this measure changes with current information. FY 07 end-of-year universe equals 151.
79
40
-------
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: GL-3
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Percent of high priority Tier 1 (significant) Great Lakes beaches
where States and local agencies have put into place water quality monitoring and public
notification programs that comply with the U.S. EPA National Beaches Guidance.
Region 2
2005 Baseline 100%
2006 End-of-Year 100% (38)
2007 End-of-Year 100% (21)
2008 Commitment 100% (21)
2009 Target 100% (21)
Universe 21
Region 3
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a 100% (327)
100% (11) 100% (334)
Region 5
100%
100% (305)
100% (306)
11
334
Total #
325
343
327
348
366
366
Total %
100%
100%*
100%
100%
100%
100%
National Program Manager Comments:
Universe for this measure changes with current information. Prior to FY 2007, Region 2's universe
included more than just the Tier 1 beaches.
80
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: GL-4
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description. GL-4a: Number of near term Great Lakes Actions on track.
GL-4b: Number of near term Great Lakes Actions completed.
Complete On Schedule
(GL-4b)
4
12
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Program Manager Comments:
(GL-4a)
40
33
Off Schedule Total*
n/a
48
45
Indicator
Indicator
45
QMR;I
Total %
n/a*
92%*
100%**
Indicator
Indicator
100%
New measure starting in FY 08. The measure language was revised for FY 08 in ACS to reflect the Quarterly
Management Report (1/08). Measure is now two parts -Actions on track (GL-4a) and Actions completed (GL-
4b) and will be reported by GLNPO only in ACS.
*These numbers have been adjusted to reflect updated information. **FY 07 end-of-year data not from ACS.
48 Near Term Actions were identified in December 2005. 3 of those actions became long-term actions in 2007.
81
41
-------
Improve the Health of the Great Lakes
Measure #: GL-5
National Office Lead: GLNPO
Measure Description: Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed within Areas of
Concern, (cumulative)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2009 Target
Universe
PART; BUD
National Commitment
n/a
n/a
n/a
21
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure added for F Y 2009 from 2007 PART review.
82
Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-33
National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation goal of 185,000 acres achieved, based on
annual monitoring from prior year.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-34
National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of the Dissolved Oxygen goal of 100% standards attainment achieved,
based on annual monitoring from the previous calendar year and the preceding 2 years.
SP-33
2OO5 Baseline
2OO6 End-of-Year
2OO7 End-of-Year
2OO8 Commitment
2OO9 Target
Universe
PART
National Commitment
39% (72,945)
42% (78,263)
32% (59,160)
n/a
n/a
185.OOO acres
SP-34
2OO5 Baseline
2OO6 End-of-Year
2OO7 End-of-Year
2OO8 Commitment
2OO9 Target
Universe
PART
National Commitment
3O% (22.73 km)*
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1OO% (74.8 km3)
2011 Target: 45% (83,250)
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: 40% (29.92 km3)
Targets/commitments deferred for FY 09. FY 07 SAV target is less than FY 06 commitment because it reflects a
more realistic yet ambitious timeframe to achieve 185,000 acres, based on consultation with top recognized,
independent experts on SAV restoration who considered anticipated nutrient and sediment reductions, knowledge and
experience with SAV recovery, and geographic location of SAV beds. *The historic dissolved oxygen results
changed due to improvements in the Assessment methodology: the inclusion of additional data; publication of a new
bio-reference curve, as described in Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen, Water Quality, and
Chlorophyll a for the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries, 2007 Addendum (EPA 2007); discovery and correction
of an error in the Fortran code that drives the analytical program.
83
42
-------
Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-35
National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of goal achieved for implementation of nitrogen reduction practices
(expressed as progress meeting the nitrogen reduction goal of 162.5 million pound reduced).
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-36
National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of goal achieved for implementation of phosphorus reduction practices
(expressed as progress meeting the phosphorus reduction goal of 14.36 million pounds).
SP-35
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
2011 Target: 59'
PART; BUD
National Commitment
41% (67 million Ibs)
44% (71.2 million Ibs)
46% (75.22 million Ibs)
50% (81.25 million Ibs)
50% (81.19 million Ibs)
100% (162.5 million Ibs)
'/a (95.88 million Ibs.)
SP-36
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
PART; BUD
National Commitment
58% (8.4 million Ibs)
60% (8.67 million Ibs)
62% (8.83 million Ibs)
66% (9.48 million Ibs)
64% (9.19 million Ibs)
100% (14.3 million Ibs)
2011 Target: 74% (10.63 million Ibs.)
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 06 PART target for SP-35: 44%; SP-36: 61 %. PART targets are less than the FY 06 commitments because
they reflect a more realistic, yet ambitious timeframe based upon historic progress, and historic and new
funding. FY 06 PART targets were met.
84
Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-37
National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of goal achieved for implementation of sediment reduction
practices (expressed as progress meeting the sediment reduction goal of 1.69 million tons
reduced).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
PART; BUD
National Commitment
54% (0.9 million tons)
57% (0.96 million tons)
62% (1.04 million tons)
64% (1.08 milliion tons)
67% (1.13 million tons)
100% (1.69 million tons)
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: 74% (1.25 million tons)
FY 06 PART target is 57%. The PART target is less than the FY 06 commitment because it reflects a more
realistic, yet ambitious timeframe based upon historic progress and historic and new funding. FY 06 PART
target was met.
85
43
-------
Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem
Measure #: CB-1
National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of point source nitrogen reduction goal of 49.9 million pounds
and of point source phosphorus reduction goal of 6.16 million pounds achieved.
(CB-la) Nitrogen reduction:
PART; BUD
(CB-lb) Phosphorus reduction:
PART; BUD
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
60.95%
68%*
69%
74%
74% (36.92 million Ibs)
100% (49.9 million Ibs/yr)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
80%
84%*
87%
85%
87% (5.36 million Ibs)
100% (6.16 million Ibs/yr)
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 06 PART Target for CB-1 a: 65%; CB-lb: 82%. FY 06 PART Targets were met.
*Note: FY 2006 commitment and result are reported numerically rather than by percent in ACS.
86
Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem
Measure #: CB-2 National Office Lead: CBPO
Measure Description: Percent of the forest buffer planting goal of 10,000 miles achieved.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
PART; BUD
National Commitment
38%
46%*
53%
60%
62% (6,182 miles)
100% (10,000 miles)
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 06 PART Target for CB-lb: 46%. PART target is less than the FY 06 Commitment because it reflects a
more realistic, yet ambitious, timeframe based upon historic progress, and historic and new funding. F Y 06
PART Target was met.
*Note: FY 2006 commitment and result are reported numerically rather than by percent in ACS.
X87
44
-------
Improve the Health of the Gulf of Mexico
Measure #: Subobjective 4.3.5
National Office Lead: GMPO
Measure Description: Improve the overall health of coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico
on the "good/fair/poor" scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-38
National Office Lead: GMPO
Measure Description: Restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality standards in
impaired segments in 13 priority areas, (cumulative starting in FY 07)
BUD
National Commitment
2.4
2.4
2.4
4.3.5
2004 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
2011 Target: 2.6
National Program Manager Comments:
2.5
2.5
5
SP-38
2002 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
0
n/a
38*
64
96
812*
2011 Target: 162
*SP-38 replaces F Y 07 measure GM-1. F Y 07 end-of-year data not from ACS. Universe changed from 354 to
812.
88
Improve the Health of the Gulf of Mexico I f I
Measure #: Subobjective SP-39 National Office Lead: GMPO
Measure Description: Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of important
coastal and marine habitats, (cumulative starting in FY 07)
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-40 National Office Lead: GMPO
Measure Description: Reduce releases of nutrients throughout the Mississippi River Basin
to reduce the size of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico, as measured by the 5-year
running average of the size of the zone.
SP-39
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
16,000
16,458
18,660
18,200
20,600
3,769,370 acres
2011 Target: 20,000 acres
SP-40
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
14,128km2
14,944 km2
20,500 km2
n/a
n/a
n/a
2015 Target: less than 5,000 km2
National Program Manager Comments:
Targets/commitments are deferred for measure SP-40.
89
45
-------
Improve the Health of the Gulf of Mexico
Measure #: GM-1
National Office Lead: GMPO
Measure Description: Implement integrated bi-national (U.S. and Mexican Border States)
early-warning system to support State and coastal community efforts to manage harmful algal
blooms (HABs).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
n/a
Supported expansion into Texas
and Florida
Expand operational system to
South Florida and South Texas
Expand operational system to
Veracruz, Mexico
Expand operational system to
Campeche, Mexico
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
FY 2008 commitment will be added to ACS at midyear.
90
Improve the Health of the Gulf of Mexico
Measure #: GM-3
National Office Lead: GMPO
Measure Description. GM-3a: Number of near term actions in the Gulf of Mexico
Alliance Governors' Action Plan that are on track. GM-3b: Number of near term actions in
the Gulf of Mexico Alliance Governors' Action Plan that are completed.
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
On Track Complete
(GM-3a) (GM-3b)
29
22
48
10
7
9
12
63
QMR
National
Commitment
0
36 (49%)
31 (42%)
60 (82%)
73
73
National Program Manager Comments:
The measure language was revised for F Y 08 in ACS to reflect the Quarterly Management Report (1/08).
Measure is now in two parts -Actions on track (GM-3a) and Actions completed (GM-3b).
91
46
-------
Restore and Protect Long Island Sound
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-41
National Office Lead: LISPO
Measure Description: Reduce point source nitrogen discharges to Long Island Sound as
measured by the Long Island Sound Nitrogen Lotal Maximum Daily Load (LMDL).
BUD
National Commitment (in TE Ibs/day)*
1999 Trade Baseline 211,724 Ibs/day" 59,146 TE Ibs/day
2006 End-of-Year 161,359 Ibs/day 40,582 TE Ibs/day
2007 End-of-Year 153,932 Ibs/day 39,232 TE Ibs/day
2008 Commitment 135,374 Ibs/day 37,323 TE Ibs/day
2009 Target 135,374 Ibs/day 37,323 TE Ibs/day
Universe n/a n/a
2014 Target: -60% reduction ftom 1999 baseline of 211,724 to 88,474 Ibs/day,
22,774 TE Ibs/day, a reduction of 36,372 TE Ibs/day from 1999 baseline of
59,146 TE Ibs/day point sources only**
National Program Manager Comments:
s X
New measure starting in FY 08. *Measure will be tracked in Ibs/day and Trade Equalized (TE) Ibs/day. TE
Ibs/day are pounds of nitrogen adjusted by application of the equivalency factor assigned to each point
source based on its proximity to the receiving water body (LIS). The TMDL established a Waste Load
Allocation of 22,774 TE Ibs/day from point sources, to be achieved over a 15 year period beginning in 1999.
The annual commitments are calculated by dividing the difference between the 1999 baseline and 2014 target
by 15 (the TMDL period), or 2,425 Ibs/day per year. **The Baseline and 2014 Target have been updated
\ from the 2006-2011 Strategic Plan. FY 06 and FY 07 data not from ACS and has been updated. /
Restore and Protect Long Island Sound
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-42 National Office Lead: LISPO
Measure Description: Reduce the size of the hypoxic area in Long Island Sound (i.e.,
defined as the area in which the long-term average maximum July-September dissolved
oxygen level is <3mg/lb; reduce the average duration of the maximum hypoxic event).
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
203 sq. miles; 58 days
200 sq. miles; 53 days*
162 sq. miles; 58 days*
n/a
n/a
n/a
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: 25°/
New measure starting in FY 08. Due to inter-annual variability, annual reduction targets are not calculated
for this measure. *FY 06 and FY 07 end-of-year data not from ACS.
93
47
-------
Restore and Protect Long Island Sound
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-43
National Office Lead: LISPO
Measure Description: Restore or protect acres of coastal habitat, including tidal wetlands,
dunes, riparian buffers, and freshwater wetlands.
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-44 National Office Lead: LISPO
Measure Description: Re-open miles of river and stream corridor to anadromous fish
passage through removal of dams and barriers or installations of by-pass structures such as
fishways. (cumulative starting in FY 06)
BUD SP-44
National Commitment
712 acres restored &
protected
826*
1,023*
862
SP-43
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
1,043**
n/a
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
81 miles
101.2*
123*
105.9 estimated
133**
n/a
2011 Target: 1,012 acres (300 additional from 05 baseline)
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: 131 miles (50 additional from 05 baseline)
New measures starting in FY 08. For SP-43: In September 2006, the LISS Policy Committee established the goal of restoring
and protecting an additional 300 acres of coastal habitat above the baseline by 2011 -50 acres per year for 6 years. For SP-44:
The states of NY and CT will re-open 50 river miles above the base for a total of 131 river miles re-opened to fish passage. *FY
06 and FY 07 end-of-year data not from ACS. """The 2011 targets were achieved in 2007. EPA will negotiate new 2011 targets
with the LISS Management Conference partners.
94
Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-45
National Office Lead: Region 4
Measure Description: Achieve "no net loss" of stony coral cover (mean percent stony coral cover) in
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) and in the coastal waters of Dade, Broward, and
Palm Beach Counties, Florida, working with all stakeholders (federal, state, regional, tribal, and local).
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-46 National Office Lead: Region 4
Measure Description: Annually maintain the overall health and functionality of sea grass beds in the
FKNMS as measured by the long-term sea grass monitoring project that addresses composition and
abundance, productivity, and nutrient availability.
SP-45
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
2011 Target: No net loss
National Program Manager Comments:
BUD
National Commitment
6.8% in FKNMS*;
5.9% in SE Florida
n/a
n/a
No net loss
No net loss
n/a
SP-46
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
El = 8.3; SCI = 0.48**
n/a
n/a
Long term average
Maintain baseline
n/a
2011 Target: Maintain baseline
New measures starting in FY 08. ^Strategic Plan baseline of 6.7% was revised to 6.8%. The Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring
Project (CREMP) for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary was modified in 2006 by dropping one hardbottom monitoring site
because of the very small percentage of stony coral cover present (less than .2%), resulting in an increase of. 1 percent in the mean
percent stony coral cover for the entire Sanctuary Statistical analyses of the CREMP indicated that sampling a reduced number of
stations at sites with low stony coral cover would still produce statistically valid results.
*EI = Elemental Indicator; SCI = Species Composition Index.
95
48
-------
Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-47
National Office Lead: Region 4
Measure Description: Annually maintain the overall water quality of the near shore and
coastal waters of the FKNMS.
BUD
National Commitment
chlorophyll < 0.2 ug/l - 43
light attentuation < 0.13/meter - 23
dissolved inorganic nitrogen £ 0.75 micromolar - 54
total phosphorus £ 0.2 micromolar - 63
2006 End-of-Year n/a
2007 End-of-Year n/a
2008 Commitment Maintain baseline
2009 Target Maintain baseline
Universe n/a
2005 Baseline
2011 Target: Maintain baseline
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure starting in F Y 08.
Baseline numbers are monitoring sites not meeting water quality parameters.
96
Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-48
National Office Lead: Region 4
Measure Description: Improve the water quality of the Everglades ecosystem as measured
by total phosphorus, including meeting the 10 parts per billion (ppb) total phosphorus
criterion throughout the Everglades Protection Area marsh and the effluent limits to be
established for discharges from stormwater treatment areas.
BUD
National Commitment
(see below *)
n/a
n/a
Maintain baseline
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
Maintain baseline
n/a
2011 Target: Maintain baseline
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure starting in F Y 08.
*2005 Baseline: Average annual geometric mean phosphorus concentrations were 5 ppb in Everglades
National Park, 10 ppb in Water Conservation Area 3 A, 13 ppb in Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, and
18 ppb in Water Conservation Area 2A; annual average flow - weighted total phosphorus discharges from
Stormwater Treatment Areas ranged from 13 ppb for area 3/4 and 98 ppb for area 1W
97
49
-------
Restore and Protect the Puget Sound Basin
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-49
National Office Lead: Region 10
Measure Description: Improve water quality and enable the lifting of harvest restrictions in
acres of shellfish bed growing areas impacted by degraded or declining water quality.
(cumulative from FY 06)
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-50
National Office Lead: Region 10
Measure Description: Remediate acres of prioritized contaminated sediments, (cumulative
starting in FY 06)
SP-49
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
n/a
100*
322*
450 (200 new)
600
30,000 acres
SP-50
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
2011 Target: 1,000 acres
National Program Manager Comments:
BUD
National Commitment
n/a
n/a
120*
100
125
5,000 acres
2011 Target: 200 acres
New measures starting inFY 08. *FY 06 andFY 07 end-of-year data not from ACS.
98
Restore and Protect the Puget Sound Basin
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-51
National Office Lead: Region 10
Measure Description: Restore acres of tidally- and seasonally-influenced estuarine
wetlands, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
n/a
750*
4,152*
2,310 (800 new)
5,700
45,000 acres
2011 Target: 3,500 acres
National Program Manager Comments:
New measure starting in FY 08.
*FY 06 and FY 07 end-of-year adjusted data not from ACS.
99
50
-------
Restore and Protect the Columbia River Basin
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-52
National Office Lead: Region 10
Measure Description: Protect, enhance, or restore acres of wetland habitat and acres of
upland habitat in the Lower Columbia River watershed, (cumulative starting in FY 05)
BUD
National Commitment
0
2,086*
(2,071 wetland + 15 upland)
4,204
8,000
10,000
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
96,770 acres
National Program Manager Comments:
2011 Target: 16,000 acres
New measure starting in FY 08.
Note: 13,000 wetland habitat acres and 3,000 upland habitat acres totals 16,000 acres.
*FY 06 and FY 07 end-of year adjusted data are not from ACS.
100
Restore and Protect the Columbia River Basin
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-53
National Office Lead: Region 10
Measure Description: Clean up acres of known contaminated sediments, (cumulative
starting in FY 06)
Measure #: Strategic Target SP-54
National Office Lead: Region 10
Measure Description: Demonstrate a reduction in mean concentration of contaminants of
concern found in water and fish tissue, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
SP-53
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
BUD
National Commitment
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
5
400 acres
SP-54
2005 Baseline
2006 End-of-Year
2007 End-of-Year
2008 Commitment
2009 Target
Universe
National Commitment
Established at 5 sites
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2011 Target: 150 acres
2011 Target: 10%
National Program Manager Comments:
New measures starting in FY 08. There will be no reporting on SP-54 until 2012.
101
51
-------
-------
i"*"^^^H8Sst# - **•*"''
"" ~ " " it JcwtfiiPwf-'-Hi
»fe;fWSl
1;» !I r IL pi'ii'Mt 'I i?i« >.'- !i- P '\
', ^'zfr
1
-A ^ I >
------- |