EPA908-R-01-010
\
A publication of The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 Ecosystem Protection Program.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Winter 2001
Restoring Contaminated
Property - EPA's Brownfields
Grants
-Mary Ahlstrom andKathie
Atencio, EPA Region 8
Since 1995, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
in Region 8 has awarded over $9 million in Brownfields
Grants to more than 20 communities, states, and tribes.
Region 8 includes the States of Colorado, Montana, North
Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming and 26
American Indian Reservations.
A Brownfields is defined as a site, or portion of a site, that
has actual or perceived contamination and an active
potential for redevelopment or reuse. Often these sites are
not developed or reused because developers fear
environmental contamination and the liabilities associated
with these properties. EPA's Brownfields Initiative
empowers states, tribes, communities, and other
stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together
in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and
sustainably reuse brownfields. It is estimated that there are
from 450,000 - 650,000 brownfields properties across the
United States.
EPA awards competitive Brownfields Grants in the
following areas: 1) to conduct environmental
investigations in determining the type and extent of
contamination and in developing clean-up/reuse options
(up to $200,000 plus $150,000 supplemental funds); 2) to
managing a revolving loan fund for cleaning-up facilities
and properties with environmental contamination (up to
$1,000,000); and 3) to train individuals in performing
environmental clean-up activities or in obtaining other
environmental jobs (up to $200,000). EPA can also utilize
its in-house contractors to conduct environmental
investigations under a Target Brownfields Assessment.
Grant recipients may receive an additional $50,000 for
determining the contamination and reuse options on
In this Issue:
- Paving our Roads with
Good Intentions 2
- Source Water Assessment
and Protection Programs 3
- Missouri River Currents 4
• Governors and Premier
Sign Red River Agreement 5
- Web Highlights 5
- What Does the Clean Water
Act Offer to Watershed Work? 6
• "Outreach Grants" for the
Nonpoint Source Pollution
Program 7
• Ecosystem Stewardship Team 8
properties that will be utilized for "Greenspace". Reuses
for the Greenspace properties have included recreational
and nature trails, golf courses, wetlands, cultural areas,
greenhouses, and open space.
For more information on Brownfields, contact Kathie
Atencio at EPA in Denver at 1-800-227-9441 X6803 or
atencio.kathie(S),epa.gov, or Mary Ahlstrom at 1-800-
227-9441 X6626 ahlstrom.marv(a),epa.gov
Visit the national Brownfields web-site at
www.epa.gov/brownfields
or the Regional page at
www.epa.gov/region8/brownfields
-------
Paving Our Roads with Good Intentions:
Environmental Planning and Review of Highway
Projects
-Brad Crowder, EPA Region 8
"Environmental streamlining" is a popular
concept. Streamlining is the process of
shortening the time necessary to plan and
complete Federal projects while meeting
the legal requirements to protect environmental and
community resources. The EPA process of reviewing
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents
such as Environmental Impact Statements and
Environmental Assessments, as required by NEPA and
Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, has been identified as a
key area of concern for streamlining. This article describes
some opportunities and concerns that are typical in
environmental streamlining of highway projects.
NEPA requires that Federal proposals look at alternatives
to proposed actions, invites public participation, and
disclose environmental impacts of proposed actions.
Highway planning in the past has typically avoided
environmental concerns until project proposals were
completed and the NEPA process was initiated. The
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century ("TEA-21")
virtually changed the Federal highway planning process.
Department of Transportation's (DOT) project planning
includes fundamental project decisions that are completed
prior to NEPA. Streamlining proposes to address and
resolve environmental concerns early in the planning and
NEPA processes.
EPA Region 8 is working with DOT officials to
accomplish the following objectives:
» Support local environmental and transportation
planning that thoroughly considers transportation
alternatives to meet community mobility and safely
needs while also minimizing environmental damages.
» Consider environmental and social effects from
multiple transportation decisions and projects that
affect economic and population growth.
» Enhance and restore environmental resources,
particularly when required to mitigate the negative
impacts from highway construction and maintenance.
» Resolve the concerns of all public interests equitably.
» Enhance broader participation of public and private
interests in highway planning.
Natural resources are often lost or degraded by highway
projects and their induced development. Adverse impacts
to wetlands, air quality, fish and wildlife habitats, and the
quality of human life are generally the most controversial
impacts associated with highway projects. Other impacts
of frequent concern are those to water resources and
quality, and prime farmland. Quality of human life factors
includes noise, visual resources, and urban and suburban
sprawl. Nearby landowners and environmental groups
often oppose highway projects because of environmental
and social impacts. At the same time, highway projects
typically enjoy widespread public support because
expanded highway capacity is believed to relieve roadway
congestion, although some studies show otherwise.
Environmental impacts of particular concern with highway
and other infrastructure projects typically fall under the
two categories of indirect and cumulative impacts. NEPA
requires analysis of direct, indirect and cumulative
impacts. According to NEPA:
» Indirect impacts are environmental effects that occur
because of a project, but later in time. Indirect
impacts often relate to economic development that
occurs due to highway improvements. Highways,
interchanges, and frontage roads in urban, suburban,
and ex-urban areas facilitate economic development
and population growth. The patterns, types, and
timing of development are affected by infrastructure
investments. Social and environmental effects may be
related to increased access to previously less
developed or even undeveloped areas. Environmental
impacts occur when land uses displace or degrade
natural resources. Induced development is a concern
for EPA particularly in rapidly growing ex-urban
areas because of the likely ecosystem impacts.
» Cumulative impacts are effects that occur as a result of
several projects and actions over time. A project's
incremental direct and indirect effects, when added to
all other past, present, and future actions, may cause
significant cumulative impacts. For example,
cumulative impacts could be caused by accumulated
salts or sediments along a highway from sanding and
other winter maintenance. Ultimately, runoff from a
highway and adjacent areas can carry pollutants to
streams and other waters. Adverse impacts to fish and
wildlife, drinking water, and other aquatic resources
may occur.
Preliminary discussions indicate that environmental
streamlining will be challenging.
(Continued on Page 4)
-------
Source Water Assessment and Protection
Programs
-Marcella Hutchinson, EPA Region 8
So, what is Source Water?
Is it ground water?
Do you mean lakes and rivers?
The answer is all of the above! The Source Water
Assessment and Protection Programs are focused on
preventing sources of people's drinking water, both
surface water and ground water, from becoming
contaminated. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA) Amendments of 1996, States developed two-
pronged programs, with source water assessments to
provide information and source water protection to prevent
contaminants from reaching the water supply or reaching
levels of concern under SDWA.
A Source Water Assessment is a tool to provide a public
water system, its customers, and the public with
information needed to decide how best to protect their
source of drinking water. The assessment identifies the
area of the watershed or aquifer from which a public water
system's drinking water is drawn, including those parts of
the area most critical for protection. The assessment then
identifies possible sources of contaminants that could
affect the water's quality, and how likely they are to cause
a problem. A point on the map readily identifies some of
these possible sources of contaminants, for example, a
chemical manufacturing site or the location at which a
wastewater treatment plant releases its effluent. Others are
land uses, like pesticide and fertilizer application for row
crop agriculture or in urban areas. Public water systems
that supply communities must report their assessment
results in their annual water quality report (consumer
confidence report) to their customers. Many States,
including most in EPA Region 8, are also posting
assessment results on their websites. You can link to State
Source Water Protection homepages from the
Headquarters EPA homepage at
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/source/contacts.html
States that enforce their own drinking water regulations
must complete source water assessments for all of their
public water systems. All States except Wyoming, which
has a voluntary Source Water Assessment and Protection
program, fall into this category. The initial assessment
phase should be completed in 2003 for most states.
While not required under SDWA, protection is the goal of
the Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs.
Building on the State Wellhead Protection Programs,
Source Water Protection focuses on managing possible
sources of contaminants to prevent pollution of drinking
water supplies, and planning for emergencies. Source
Water Protection is up to local communities, and is
voluntary in most Region 8 States. The Source Water
Protection umbrella covers a wide variety of possibilities
including watershed approach activities, development of a
local wellhead protection plan, the use of permits, local
land use ordinances or zoning, and/or public education.
State and federal agencies may be important partners in
these local efforts.
For more information on EPA's Source Water Assessment
and Protection Programs, please contact Marcella
Hutchinson of the Source Water/Ground Water Team by
e-mail at hutchinson.marcellafa),epa.gov or at 1-800-227-
9441 X6753.
You can also visit the US EPA Headquarters website at:
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/protecthtml or the EPA
Region 8 website at
http://www.epa.gov/region08/water/swap/swap.html
For information on your State's Source Water Protection
Programs, see the table below for a contact person.
State
Colorado
Montana
North
Dakota
South
Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Agency
Department of
Public Health
and Environment
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Department of
Health
Department of
Natural
Resources
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Department of
Environmental
Quality
Contact
Gary Karst
Joe Meek
Scott Radig
Tricia
Sebes
Sumner
Newman
Kim Parker
Phone
(303)
692-3579
(406)
444-4806
(701)
328-5233
(605)
773-3296
(801)
536-4195
(307)
777-7343
When the well's 4ry, we know the worth of water.
— Benjamin Franklin,
Poor Richard's Almanac
-------
Missouri River Currents:
Yellowstone River Roundtable
-Peter Ismert, EPA Region 8
The Yellowstone River begins as a small creek on the
slopes of Younts Peak in the Teton Wilderness and flows
for 676 miles through Montana to the confluence with the
Missouri River in western North Dakota. The upper half
of the river, primarily from the headwaters to Billings,
Montana, supports a cold-water fishery. The lower portion
of the river is warm-water habitat for native fish species
such as the sicklefin chub, paddlefish, sturgeon chub, and
the endangered pallid sturgeon. The Yellowstone River is
a significant national resource that supports many diverse
uses. Communities use the river for recreation, irrigation,
drinking water, and for industrial purposes. The river is
the focus of fast-growing ecological, economic, social, and
political concerns.
The Yellowstone River Roundtable meeting in October
2000 was another of an increasingly more frequent type of
event that brings people together of all interests to devise
ways to agree on resource management and conservation
issues. The purpose of the Roundtable was to "to obtain
commitment for an enhanced, coordinated effort among
state and federal management agencies based upon locally
driven processes to promote conservation of the river
system." This goal was easily achieved. Government
agency representatives came away with confidence that
community organizations and governments can collaborate
with all interests to gather the necessary data and
information that will lead to sound resource management
decisions. Spearheading this collaborative effort will be
the Yellowstone River Conservation District Council.
A Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will be soon be
formed and will be made up of individuals from a broad
range of interests, including industries, local governments,
the public, and environmental groups. The RAC, a
locally-driven collaborative process, will make
recommendations to the Council on resource use and
conservation decisions. In addition, many government
agencies have responsibilities and authorities along the
river. Through the Council, the RAC can help these
agencies make decisions that not only meet their goals and
mandates, but will also meet the needs of landowners and
other community members.
Funding from EPA's Regional Geographic Initiative grant
helped kick-start the Yellowstone Roundtable meeting by
providing grants to the Council and the Conservation
Forum for internal coordination, and to the Montana
The Yellowstone River as it flows undammed across
Montana to Williston, ND.
~Photo by Peter Ismert
Watercourse for planning the meeting.
Another collaborative effort on the river is the Governor's
Upper Yellowstone River Task Force which was formed
due to concern about the effects of proposed and
possible future, channel modifications. The section of
river being evaluated by the Task force is from Gardiner,
MT (at the northern boarder of Yellowstone National Park)
80 miles downstream to Springdale, MT. The Task Force
provides a public forum for a diverse group of watershed
and river users to seek solutions to river channel problems.
The Task Force and permitting agencies agree that a
comprehensive investigation of the cumulative effects of
river channel modifications is needed to ensure that long-
term solutions are developed.
For further information, please contact Peter Ismert at
1-800-227-9441 X6215 or ismert.peterfa)epa.gov
(Paving our Roads Continued from Page 2)
Environmental and natural resources agencies are unable
to identify advantages of streamlining to accomplish their
agencies' missions compared to conventional
environmental review and consultation. Competing work
demands provide more payoffs for their missions
compared to completing highways faster. Hence, shifts in
resources have not occurred. The U.S. Congress and other
decision-makers will continue to scrutinize the time
required to complete highway projects and are likely to
provide a combination of pressures and incentives for
agencies to accelerate NEPA and related statutory
environmental requirements. For further information,
please contact Brad Crowder at 1-800-227-9441 X6396
or crowder.brad(S),epa.gov
I started out thinking of America as highways and state lines. As I got to know it better, I began to
think of it as rivers. ~ Charles Kuralt from the Magic of Rivers
-------
Governors and Premier Sign Red River
Agreement
-Stacey Eriksen, EPA Region 8
On November 15, at the final meeting of the International
Flood Mitigation Initiative (IFMI), Minnesota Governor
Jesse Ventura, North Dakota Governor Edward Shafer, and
Manitoba Premier Gary Doer met face-to-face for the first
time. They came together to hear ideas from a two -year
initiative funded by Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Project IMPACT (building a disaster
resistant community) and signed a memorandum of
understanding. Thus, they committed to meet regularly to
discuss flood prevention, to help facilitate public and
private flood mitigation initiatives and to possibly create a
new international commission to make sure the job gets
done. Ideas pitched by the International Flood Mitigation
Initiative include; establishing a partnership by media in
the basin to inform the public on flood mitigation plans,
setting up a Red River Basin Institute for Research,
Mapping and Watershed Education, founding an Institute
of Floodplain Architecture, and developing a Greenway on
the Red River. EPA Region 8 has funded Greenway on
the Red with $25,000 of Regional Geographic Initiative
money. Governor Ventura stated about the Greenway,
"it's nice to see cooperative government working in a
tripartisan manner." Premier Doer said the Greenway was
"a very positive measure."
Ventura, Doer, and Schafer
-Photo by Jeanne Kern, FEMA
"Reverence for nature is compatible with
the willingness to accept responsibility
for a creative stewardship of the earth."
~ Rene Dubos 1901 -1982
Web Highlights
I ^Contributed by Greg Davis & Stacey Eriksen,
I EPA Region 8
[ # EPA Region 8 National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) Homepage:
http://www.epa.gov/region08/
laws_enforcement/nepa/nepa.html
The NEPA Website provides:
• Description of how NEPA works
• EPA Comment Letters to Environmental Impact
Statements (EIS) and Environmental
Assessments (EA)
• Guidance on how to get involved in
EISs/EAs/NEPA process
| * EPA Region 8 Air Homepage:
http://www.epa.gov/region08/air/
This site provides:
• links to live air quality data
• information on how air quality is monitored
• education/tools on indoor air
I * EPA Headquarters Envirofacts Data
Warehouse and Applications:
http://www.epa.gov/enviro/
index_java.html
This site provides:
| • Data and locations for all EPA permits
• Download or link to one or all of the EPA
databases
i * EPA Office of Water:
http://www.epa.gov/owm/pdfs/
smartgro.pdf
Potential Roles for Clean Water State Revolving
Fund Programs in Smart Growth Initiatives
• *SprawlWatch Clearinghouse:
http://www.sprawlwatch.org/
newsletter.html
I * Sprawl Costs us All: How your taxes fuel
I suburban sprawl
http://www.sierraclub.org/sprawl/
reportOO/
I # Another Cost of Sprawl: The Effects of Land
I Use on Utility Service Costs and
Geographically-Sensitive User Rates:
http://www.istea.org/smartgrowth/
water.htm |
-------
What Does the Clean Water Act Offer to
Watershed Work?
-Karen Hamilton, EPA Region 8
This is the first in a series of articles about certain sections
of the Clean Water Act and how they might provide tools
for watershed restoration and protection. This first article
provides a very brief description of the intersection
between watershed planning and the Clean Water Act. In
the next articles, more details about each section of the
Clean Water Act will be given.
Thousands of people in the western
United States are dedicated to working
collaboratively toward restoring and
protecting water quality in the watersheds
where they live. Every watershed group
is unique because they reflect the local issues, leaders,
landscape, and culture. Yet, they have some common
characteristics and activities. One of the commonalities
among watershed groups is the need to develop goals
based on watershed issues, and ways to meet those goals.
Often this is done through some kind of plan. When the
issues have to do with water quality threats or problems,
the resulting plan will likely have activities that:
1) Set goals for the water bodies of concern;
2) Figure out water quality trends and sources of pollution;
3) Protect and restore water quality, including habitat; and
4) Determine how effective the actions have been to meet
the goals.
The Clean Water Act provides a framework that can be
tailored, in part or wholly, to locally developed watershed
plans that emphasize water quality. At a minimum, if you
are working with a watershed group, understanding the
various parts of the Clean Water Act will be useful to you.
A State water quality agency is responsible for managing
the water quality of the lake or stream you are working
with (e.g., The Colorado Water Quality Control Division,
or the Utah Department of Environmental Quality)
according to the Clean Water Act. This agency describes
what uses each water body in the State should be able to
provide, such as drinking water, warm water fishery, and
swimming (full immersion human contact). The agency
collects water quality information on the waters in the
State to determine whether they are able to provide those
uses. The agency also permits discharges and provides
funding to protect some water bodies and restore others in
order to meet the expectations of their uses.
All of these activities carried out by your State water
quality agency can give you a starting point for setting
goals and gathering data about your stream or lake. In
addition there may be an opportunity for you to obtain
some funding and technical assistance to aid in your quest
for understanding and protecting your lake or stream.
Finally, the uses expected of each water body are
established by a citizen's regulatory board, council or
commission through a public process; therefore, you may
wish to become more involved in this process and other
activities conducted by the State water quality agency that
affect your water body.
In the following table, the elements of a typical watershed
plan are compared to Clean Water Act sections that
address those elements.
Watershed Planning
GENERIC PLAN
* Goal Setting
* Water Quality Data Development
* Watershed Assessment, including
knowing where pollutants or problems
are coming from.
CLEAN WATER ACT
* Section 303 (Water Quality Standards) - uses designated by the State water
quality board, council, or commission for each stream segment and the criteria
for many water quality characteristics that are needed to maintain those uses.
* Section 305(b), which requires a biennial report from States that describe water
quality status.
* Section 106, which provides funding to the States' water quality programs.
* Section 104(b), which authorizes the use of funds for special studies, planning,
research, data gathering through a variety of ways including volunteer
monitoring programs.
* Section 303, which requires stream segments that are not meeting uses
designated by the State to be on a list of impaired, streams (303 (d) list.)
(Continued on Page 7)
-------
(Clean Water Act Continued from Page 6)
Watershed Assessment, including
knowing where pollutants or problems
are coming from.
Section 303 which requires that the pollutants causing impairments be allocated
among their sources, with limits on the sources so that the standards (goals) are
met (Total Maximum Daily Loads) (a "pollution budget").
Section 104 which authorizes funds for a variety of needs, including data
analysis and management.
Section 208 - Area-wide waste treatment management planning
Implementation
Protection and Stewardship
Restoration
Funding authorized by Sections 104 (general studies, etc.) and Section 319
(nonpoint source).
Funding authorized by Section 601 (State Revolving Fund).
Section 402 - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits,
including stormwater permits
Section 404 stream channel and wetlands permits.
Educational programs developed for the nonpoint source program (Section
319) or other programs such as stream channel and wetlands protection
(Sections 104 and 404).
Evaluation and Adjustment
Requirements under Sections 104 and 319 (nonpoint source program) for
monitoring restoration projects.
Section 305(b) requires biennial State reporting of water quality.
Section 303 triennial review of State stream standards.
For more information, please contact Karen Hamilton at
1-800-227-9441 X6236 or hamilton.karen(a)epa.gov
"Outreach Grants" for the Colorado Nonpoint Source Pollution Program
-Loretta Lohman, Colorado Nonpoint Source Information and Education Coordinator
The Colorado Nonpoint Source (NPS) Program, through the Education and Information Coordinator, is charged
with increasing interest, participation and knowledge of the public, educators and entities involved in water-related
activities regarding NPS and associated water quality issues.
How is the goal achieved? To do this the NPS Program has developed a program of "mini grants" that
provides funding for small projects outside the more rigorous NPS grant program. The goal of the mini-grant
program is to support information exchange, education and hands-on efforts to provide information and alternative
actions to the citizens of Colorado related to nonpoint source water pollution. One priority is for grants awarded to
educational institutions before the start of each school year.
The Grants: The grants in this program are awarded by the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment, Water Quality Control Division, on a cost-reimbursement basis. Project sponsors will be reimbursed
for costs incurred to implement the project based on the budget provided in the proposal. Mini-grants can be
made for up to $5,000 although typical grants range from $1,000 to $2,500. Matching funds are required, but may
be either in-kind services or in dollars—increasing the scope of your program.
For more information, contact Loretta Lohman, Colorado Nonpoint Source Information and Education
Coordinator, before March 15, 2001, at CSU-Cooperative Extension, Denver, 110 16th Street, Suite 300, Denver,
CO 80202, 303-549-3063 cell, 720-913-5285 phone, 720-913-5289 fax, or E-mail:
llohman@coop.ext.colostate.edu
-------
ID Team
Karen Hamilton
(303)312-6236
hamilton.karen(5).epa. gov
Stacey Eriksen
(303)312-6692
eriksen. stacev(5).epa. gov
Doug Johnson
(303)312-6834
iohnson.douglas@epa.gov
Ayn Schmit
(303)312-6220
schmit. avn(5).epa. gov
Peter Ismert
(303)312-6215
ismert.peterfSlepa. gov
Deb Lebow
(303)312-6223
lebow.deborahfSlepa. gov
Marc Alston
(303)312-6556
alston.marc(5).epa. gov
Editor:
Stacey Eriksen
Check out Community Based
Environmental Protection on the web:
http://www.epa.gov/region08/community
_resources/cbep/cbep. html
Out of the area? Call 1-800-227-8917
and the extension of the person you are
trying to reach.
If you have an article concerning
ecosystem protection, community
based environmental protection, or
watersheds, we would like to hear
from you!
We need your help in updating our
mailing list in order to keep Natural
News coming to you!
Conserve our natural resources, please
share your copy of Natural News with a
friend or recycle.
We are interested in feedback on Natural
News.
To submit articles for future editions, to
make changes to the mailing list, or to
submit comments, please contact:
Stacey Eriksen
999 18th Street, Suite 300
8EPR-EP
Denver, CO 80202-2466
(303) 312-6692
(800)227-8917x6692
eriksen.stacev@epa.qov
U.S. EPA
999 18th Street, Suite 300
8EPR-EP
Denver, CO 80202-2466
------- |