FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
FY 2016-2017
Draft National Water Program Guidance
Office of Water
February 2015
&EPA
EPA420-D-15-002
Office of Water
Page 1 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
of
I. Introduction 4
II. National Water Program Areas of Focus Guidance 7
A. Protecting Populations at Risk 7
1. Children's Health 7
2. Environmental Justice 7
B. Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality 10
C. Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure 12
D. Controlling Nutrient Pollution 16
E. Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information 17
III. National Water Program (Subobjective) Specific Guidance 20
A. Cross-Cutting Themes 20
1. National Water Program and Tribes 20
2. Protecting Urban Waters 22
3. Climate Change 23
4. Implementing Innovative Technology in Water 25
5. Grants Management 26
B. Strategies to Protect Public Health 28
1. Water Safe to Drink 29
2. Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat 38
3. Water Safe for Swimming 39
C. Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands 40
1. Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 40
2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters 55
3. Increase Wetlands 58
D. Strategies to Protect and Restore the Health of Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems 61
1. The Great Lakes 61
2. The Chesapeake Bay 63
3. The Gulf of Mexico 65
4. Long Island Sound 67
5. The Puget Sound 67
6. U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health 69
7. Pacific Island Territories 70
Office of Water Page 2 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
8. The South Florida Ecosystem 70
9. The Columbia River Basin 72
10. The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 73
E. Appendices 75
1. FY 2016 National Water Program Measures 75
2. Explanation of Key Changes Summary 94
3. Key Contacts 104
4. Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106 State and Interstate Recipients 105
Office of Water Page 3 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
I.
The National Water Program Guidance (Guidance) for fiscal years (FY) 2016 and 2017 describes how the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), states, territories, and tribal governments will work together to
protect and improve the quality of the Nation's waters, including wetlands, and ensure safe drinking
water. Within EPA, the Office of Water (OW) oversees the delivery of the national water programs,
while the regional offices work with states, tribes, territories, and others to implement these programs
and other supporting efforts. In drafting this Guidance, OW recognizes that the federal budget is
shrinking and that states, tribes, territories, and municipalities may be experiencing budget shortfall due
to a slowly recovering economy. In this environment, it is important for EPA to continue to work with
partners to focus resources on the highest priorities and find the most efficient path towards achieving
clean and safe water goals.
Section II. National Areas of Focus Guidance, describes priority program areas for FY 2016-2017. EPA,
states, and tribes need to give special attention to these national priority areas to ensure safe and clean
water for all Americans. In doing so, OW 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.
Section III. Program Specific Guidance, describes the key actions needed to accomplish the public health
and environmental goals in the EPA Strategic Plan1. The Strategic Plan addresses water programs in Goal
2, Protecting America's Waters. In Goal 2, two key objectives, Protect Human Health and Protect and
Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems, are supported by subobjectives that define specific
environmental or public health results to be accomplished by the National Water Program. This
Guidance is organized into 15 subobjectives2 and cross-cutting water themes to describe the increment
of environmental progress that EPA hopes to make in FY 2016 and FY 2017 and the program strategies
to be used to accomplish these objectives. In the Guidance, these subobjectives are organized into three
areas:
• Protect human 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
• Protect and restore the health of large aquatic ecosystems across the country.
Appendix A includes a comprehensive list of performance measures that support the subobjective
strategies and are used to manage water programs. More detailed measure information, including
definition and methodology, will be available online3 as supplemental information to this Guidance.
Three types of performance measures include:
• "Outcome" Strategic Target Measures: Measures of environmental or public health impacts (i.e.
outcomes) are described in the EPA Strategic Plan with long-range targets and in this Guidance.
• National Program Activity Measures (PAMs): Core water PAMs (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
1 The EPA Strategic Plan is available at the following website: http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan.
2 The Guidance also contains one additional section covering the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary.
3 Supplemental information to the Guidance is at TBD.
Office of Water Page 4 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
FY 2016 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 2015.
• Ecosystem Measures: These measures address activities to restore and protect communities and
large aquatic ecosystems and implement other water program priorities in EPA regional offices.
The process for managing water program strategies includes a three part process:
• Part 1 is the development of this Guidance, starting with a review of measures in the fall of 2014, a
draft Guidance by mid-February 2015, and the final Guidance by May 2015.
• The Office of Water conducted an early engagement process with states and tribes in July and
August 2014. The comments received ranged from general to cross program to specific program
and measures. The comments were reviewed by water subobjective leads and regions and were
incorporated, if appropriate, in the FY 2016-2017 NWPG
• Part 2 involves consultation and planning among EPA regions, states, and tribes, to be conducted
during the Spring/Summer 2015, to convert the "targets" in this Guidance into regional
"commitments" that are supported by Performance Partnership Agreements and other grant
workplans 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, along with this
Guidance, the "strategy" for the National Water Program for FY 2016-2017.
• Part 3 involves work to be done during FY 2016-2017 to assess progress in program implementation
and improve program performance.
OW will continue to 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 OW that all grants are to comply with applicable grants requirements regardless of whether the
program specific guidance document addresses the requirement.
The grant guidances for the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 106 Water Pollution Control, Public Water
System Supervision (PWSS), Underground Injection Control (UIC), and the Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF) programs are incorporated into relevant subobjectives in this Guidance.
The Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Overview4 to the National Program Manager (NPM)
Guidances communicates important agency-wide information and should be reviewed in conjunction
with this Guidance as well as other applicable requirements. The Agency's Overview also includes
important background information and the eleven cross-program areas that are critical to effective
implementation of EPA's environmental programs in FY 2016 and FY 2017.
The key contacts for this Guidance are:
• Mike Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water.
• Tim Fontaine, Senior Budget Officer and Director of Resource Management Staff.
• Michael Mason, Planning and Evaluation Team Leader
• Venus Miranda Reyes, Program Analyst.
4 Read the Agency's Overview at: http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/national-program-manager-guidances.
Office of Water Page 5 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Key contacts by subobjective are listed in Appendix B and posted with other related documents at
http://water.epa.gov/resource_performance/planning/FY-2015-National-Water-Program-Guidance.cfm.
(Replace link above with link to new FY2016-2017 planning webpage when available)
Office of Water Page 6 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Protecting children's environmental health is a priority for the National Water Program. Schools and
child care centers are a critical subset of small drinking water systems for which EPA is also continuing to
provide special emphasis in FY 2016 and FY 2017 to ensure that children receive water that is safe to
drink. There are approximately 7,300 schools and child care centers that are also public water systems
(PWS). Similar to other small systems, schools and child care centers often do not have the technical,
managerial, or financial (IMF) capacity to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
requirements, including maintaining a certified operator.
for FY 2016-2017
• States will assist in disseminating user-friendly materials developed by EPA and will provide training
and outreach to ensure that these systems understand their responsibilities to comply with the
Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR).5
• States will work, including in partnership with EPA, to ensure that violations occurring at schools and
child care centers are addressed quickly and these systems are returned to compliance.
Children's Health Performance Measures
• Indicator SDW-17 (page 1, Appendix A) tracks schools and child care centers meeting health-based
drinking water standards.
2. Environmental Justice
OW will work to create healthy and sustainable communities, for all people, by decreasing
environmental burdens and increasing environmental benefits. To implement the Agency's
environmental justice (EJ) priority, to expand the conversation on environmentalism and working for EJ,
the EPA adopted Plan EJ 2014s, as its overarching EJ strategy. OW supports this priority by working with
NPMs and regions to mobilize resources to address the needs of disproportionately unserved and
underserved communities through strategies and tools that include: (1) EJSCREEN, (2) EJ Legal Tools, (3)
incorporating EJ in rules, (4) incorporating EJ in permits, and (5) intra- and interagency collaborations to
support community-based work in overburdened communities.
OW places emphasis on achieving results in areas with potential EJ concerns through Water Safe to
Drink (Subobjective 2.1.1) and Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat (Subobjective 2.1.2). 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 2.2.9); 2) Sustain and Restore Pacific Island
Territories (Subobjective 2.2.10); and 3) Alaska Native Village (ANV) Program. This focus will result in
improved environmental quality for all people, including the unserved and underserved subpopulations
living in areas with potential disproportionately high and adverse impacts on human health. OW will
integrate EJ principles into its programmatic and regional decision making through the use of
rulemaking, policy, screening and legal tools.
5 Read more on RTCR at http://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/plan-ej/index.html.
6 Read more on Plan EJ 2014 at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/plan-ej/index.html.
Office of Water Page 7 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
OW will explore ways to collaborate with OEJ and other EPA offices on how to best develop climate
change adaptation policies and strategies that pay close attention to populations that are especially
vulnerable to a changing climate.
OW will continue to consult with EJ communities to improve our understanding and analyses of the
potential impacts of water regulations on those communities.
OW will work closely with other EPA offices to ensure that the Agency's broader EJ efforts are
informed by the consideration of communities' drinking water and surface water quality.
OW, along with other EPA NPMs and regions, are working to transition their existing EJ screening
efforts from existing tools and approaches toward EJSCREEN, EPA's nationally consistent EJ
screening tool that is currently available for use by EPA staff. OW will continue to support the
National Water Program's use of EJSCREEN to inform surface water EJ screening, in coordination
with other EPA offices, regions, and state and tribal partners.
OW will continue to develop Geographic Information System (GIS) capabilities that will allow
managers of the various components of the National Water Program to identify and target their
specific program responsibilities toward communities of potential EJ concern. OW will leverage the
existing EJSCREEN methodology and data for identifying potential EJ communities while adding OW-
related program data.
As part of the EJ in Permitting pilot, and to the extent resources and circumstances allow, EPA
headquarters and regions will work to test, evaluate, and refine draft tools to enhance consideration
of EJ when developing EPA-issued permits and ensure opportunities for meaningful public
involvement.
OW will continue to develop and track measures that characterize actions taken, or that
characterize environmental or health conditions of overburdened communities/children as outlined
in the FY 2012 Annual Action for the Cross-cutting Strategy for EJ and Children's Health, using
EJSCREEN and other EJ tools as appropriate.
The Urban Waters Program7 will advance EJ goals through activities such as: providing technical
support and funding for place-based projects through EPA's Urban Waters Small Grants program;
EPA funding to the Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration Grant Program managed by the National
Fish and Wildlife Foundation; support provided by the Urban Waters Federal Partnership; EJ related
support to the Urban Waters Learning Network; and development of tools for local action at the
community level. The National Water Program will share both barriers and effective practices for
engaging overburdened communities that are identified through Urban Waters program activities.
These lessons learned will be shared within the National Water Program and with OEJ.
OW will promote infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged communities through
DWSRF that reduce public exposure to contaminants through compliance with regulations and
support the reliable delivery of safe water by community water systems (CWSs).
OW will promote infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged communities through the
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) that protect and restore water quality.
The EPA National Tribal Drinking Water Program8 will continue to maintain its commitment to
improve the provision of safe drinking water in Indian country by working with PWSs to maintain
and improve compliance with the national primary drinking water regulations (NPDWRs) through
use of infrastructure funding, technical assistance, and enforcement actions. EPA will also continue
to work in partnership with the Indian Health Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and
7 Read more on the Urban Waters Program at http ://www. epa. gov/urbanwaters/.
8 Read more on tribal program funding at http://water.epa.gov/aboutow/ogwdw/tribal.cfm#funding.
Office of Water Page 8 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through the Infrastructure Task Force
(ITF)9 to increase access to safe water, basic sanitation, and solid waste management services. To
support better management and maintenance of water systems in Indian country, EPA will continue
to implement the National Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification program to ensure that
tribal water utility obtain the proper certification needed to provide safe drinking water. In addition,
OW will work with partners to develop a methodology to assess the financial cost burden to operate
and maintain drinking water and clean water infrastructure.
• OW will focus on activities encouraging states to assess fish and shellfish tissue for contaminants in
waters used for fishing by minority and sensitive populations, particularly those that catch fish for
subsistence. Such populations may include women of child bearing age, children, African Americans,
Asian Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, Native American Indians and Alaska Natives, and Native
Hawaiians.
• EPA will continue to prioritize funding to U.S.-Mexico border communities based on the most severe
public health and environmental conditions. These communities are looking to EPA as a last-resort
funding source when utilities, cities, or states are not able to fully finance needed infrastructure
improvements.
• The ANV10 program, through the State of Alaska, will provide grant funds to under-served Native
Alaska communities to improve or to construct drinking water and wastewater facilities thereby
improving local health and sanitation conditions. EPA will provide funding for ANV infrastructure
needs through the clean water and drinking water tribal set-aside programs11. The ANV program is
unique in that it is also authorized to support training and technical assistance programs related to
the technical, managerial, and financial requirements of managing drinking water and sanitation
systems in rural Alaska.
• In the Pacific Island territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI), EPA will continue the strategic use of grants, technical assistance, and
enforcement to improve institutional capacity and infrastructure. Water and sewer service in the
U.S. Pacific Islands has lagged that of the U.S. mainland for decades. More specifically, EPA will use
grants, technical assistance, and enforcement to improve utility engineering and management,
construct better infrastructure, and promote asset management to extend the life of infrastructure,
all with the intent to provide Pacific Islanders with the same quality of water that most of the U.S.
enjoys, and protect Pacific Islanders from undertreated sewage.
• OW will work with states to identify ways to protect vulnerable populations through authorized
state clean water and drinking water programs.
For Urban Waters program measures, the National Water Program will use EJSCREEN to inform an
analysis of the program's activities supporting environmental justice and to inform program planning.
Measure WQ-25a tracks the number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in
the community.
The challenges associated with the provision of safe drinking water in Indian country are similar to
challenges facing other small communities: a lack of technical, managerial, and financial capacity to
effectively operate and maintain drinking water systems. The magnitude of these challenges in Indian
country is demonstrated by tribal water system compliance with health-based regulations (measure
9 Read more on ITF at http ://www. epa. gov/tp/trprograms/infra-water, htm.
10 Read more on ANV at http://www.epa.gov/alaskanativevillages.
11 Read more on the Tribal Set-Asides Program at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/allotments/tribes.cfm.
Office of Water Page 9 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
SDW-SP3.N11). EPA recognizes that not all tribal communities are disproportionately burdened by
environmental hazards, and thus, do not present a universal need for EJ. However, the measure
indicates that a greater proportion of the overall population in Indian country lacks access to safe
drinking water and receives drinking water that is not in compliance with all applicable health-based
drinking water standards compared to the U.S. population on the whole. In addition, measure SDW-18-
N.ll tracks the number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to safe drinking
water in coordination with other federal agencies.
Through the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program, underserved communities build and
improve drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. Many households in the communities receive
drinking water or wastewater service for the first time. These first time service connections are tracked
by measures MB-SP24.N11 and MB-SP25.N11 - additional homes served by improvements in water
services.
ANVs are unique populations that often have extreme sanitation difficulties relative to people in the
lower 48 states. Measure WQ-23 tracks the percentage of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to
safe drinking water supply and wastewater disposal. When compared to the national average, ANVs
continue to stand out as under-served populations for both safe drinking water infrastructure and
adequate wastewater treatment. Consequently, these villages experience disproportional exposure to
untreated or under-treated wastewater.
The Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR). The fundamental public health protection mission of the
national drinking water program is to ensure that PWSs deliver drinking water that meets national
primary drinking water standards to their customers. The development and implementation of health
protection-based regulatory standards for drinking water quality to limit human exposure to
contaminants of concern is the cornerstone of the program. Systems meet standards by employing
"multiple barriers of protection" including source water protection to limit contaminant occurrence,
various stages of treatment, proper operation and maintenance of the distribution and finished water
storage system, operator certification and training, and customer awareness. Efforts continue to be
made to bring non-complying systems into compliance and to help all systems be prepared to comply
with the new regulations and be sustainable over the long run.
EPA published the RTCR in February 2013. The RTCR is a revision to the 1989 Total Coliform Rule (TCR)12
and strengthens the objective of the TCR to protect public health by ensuring the integrity of the
drinking water distribution system and monitoring for the presence of microbial contamination. EPA
anticipates greater public health protection under the revised requirements based on recommendations
by a federal advisory committee including consideration of state and public comments. The final RTCR13
requires PWSs that are vulnerable to microbial contamination to identify and correct problems (the
"find and fix" model), establishes criteria for PWSs to qualify for and stay on reduced monitoring
reducing water system burden and provide incentives for better system operation. The 1989 TCR
remains effective until March 31, 2016. PWSs and primacy agencies must comply with the requirements
of the RTCR beginning April 1, 2016. During FY 2016, HQ and regional programs will continue to develop
guidance materials, and provide outreach and training to states and drinking water systems to help with
implementing of the RTCR. In addition, since a large percentage of states have requested an extension
12 Read more on TCR at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/tc^asicinformation.cfm.
13 Read more on RTCR at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/tcr/regulation revisions.cfm.
Office of Water Page 10 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
to the deadline for adoption of the RTCR, HQ will provide technical assistance to the regions in their
partnership with the states on workload activities to ensure effective implementation of the rule.
The Lead and Copper Rule. Completing the review of the Lead and Copper Rule in accordance with the
EPA's Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective Review of Existing Regulations. The Retrospective Review
sought ways to simplify and clarify requirements imposed on drinking water systems to maintain safe
levels of lead and copper in drinking water. As part of the guidance process, EPA solicited input from a
working group of stakeholders, who will inform recommendations from the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council. The EPA will propose revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule in FY 2015. The final
revisions will be promulgated within 18 months of publication of the proposal.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) Program Reviews. Also discussed in Section
III.C. the NPDES program is committed to closer coordination between EPA headquarters, regions, and
states - as well as between EPA's water and enforcement/compliance programs - to integrate the
oversight of NPDES permitting and enforcement activities and promote greater program efficiency,
transparency, and integrity.
After piloting Permit Quality Review And State Review Framework (PQR-SRF) integrated reviews in FY
2012 and FY 2013, EPA determined that the efficiency and benefits of integrated reviews vary across
EPA regions and states. Therefore, beginning in FY 2014 and continuing in FY 2015, EPA regions
conducted PQR and SRF reviews either separately or integrated, at their discretion. This practice will
continue in FY 2016 and FY 2017. Given the Agency goal of completing NPDES reviews for all states
(including states not yet authorized to implement the NPDES program) on a five-year cycle, EPA expects
to conduct approximately 10 reviews in each upcoming fiscal year. Note that EPA headquarters conducts
PQRs for the states, territories, and tribes for which EPA regions write NPDES permits. The system
tracking PQR action items will no longer be updated to include SRF review action items but EPA will
maintain and update its commitment and tracking system to reflect implementation of action items
identified in PQRs.
RTCR
• In FY 2016 and 2017, states will begin to implement the RTCR. States that have obtained an
extension to submit their primacy applications in 2016 will work with EPA regions to have their
primacy applications reviewed to ensure efficient implementation of the RTCR. EPA will partner with
states to identify additional training and technical assistance materials. See also Section III.B.I.
NPDES Program Reviews
• In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA will continue the process of conducting PQR/SRF NPDES reviews. Given
the Agency goal of completing NPDES reviews for all states (including states not yet authorized to
implement the NPDES program) on a five-year cycle, EPA expects to conduct 10-12 reviews per fiscal
year.
• EPA will maintain its commitment and tracking system to reflect implementation of action items
identified in PQRs.
• Subobjective2.1.1 and measures SDW-211, SDW-SP1.N11, SDW-SP2, and SDW-SP3.Nllwill reflect
compliance with the RTCR starting in FY 2016.
Office of Water Page 11 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• WQ-11 (page 4, Appendix A) tracks the cumulative number, and national percent, of follow-up
actions that are completed by assessed NPDES programs.
Rebuilding After Hurricane Sandy. In the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, wastewater and drinking water
systems in New York and New Jersey were so severely damaged that some could not provide safe
drinking water or treat raw sewage. The Disaster Relief Appropriations Act (DRAA) of 2013 provided
funding to EPA's DWSRF and CWSRF for eligible projects whose purpose is to reduce flood damage risk
and vulnerability or to enhance resiliency to rapid hydrologic change or a natural disaster at treatment
works. Drinking water and wastewater projects funded by the DRAA may serve as a model for
adaptation and resiliency to future disasters resulting from intense weather events, ocean surges, sea
level rise, and water inundation.
Protecting Drinking Water Supplies. The Source Water Protection Program is a voluntary program of
federal agencies, states, associations, local governments, drinking water utilities and other organizations
working to protect drinking water sources through collaboration and partnerships.14 Source water
includes surface water and ground water, as well as the interchange between them15. Source water
protection objectives include preventing contamination of source waters and reducing existing levels of
contamination, leading to reduced risks to public health, and potential drinking water treatment cost
savings. Source water availability is integral to drinking water protection.
Improving Small System Capacity. Many small PWSs16 face challenges in reliably providing safe drinking
water and meeting the requirements of SDWA. As a result, some small systems may experience
frequent or long-term compliance challenges. The 1996 SDWA Amendments recognized these
challenges and established a strong emphasis on enhanced water system management to achieve public
health protection. The Amendments also provided a framework for assisting PWSs in acquiring and
maintaining TMF capacity that is necessary for systems to provide safe water over the long-term and
promote sustainable water infrastructure. EPA continues to work with states and tribes, as well as with
utility associations, third-party technical assistance providers and other federal partners, to promote the
sustainability practices that are the foundation for building technical, managerial, and financial capacity,
known as Capacity Development.17 The process includes the implementation of system-wide planning
practices such as asset management, water conservation and efficiency, energy efficiency, rate setting
and effective pricing practices.18 A new small drinking water system priority goal is included in the FY
2014-2018 Strategic Plan that focuses on the next phase of the 2012-2013 priority goal - to have
additional states and tribes improve system capacity:
o By September 30, 2015, EPA will engage with an additional ten states (for a total of 30
states) and three tribes to improve small drinking water system capability to provide safe
drinking water, an invaluable resource.
Maintaining Healthy Waters. Implementing holistic approaches, including green infrastructure, help
maintain healthy waters. The Nation has made significant progress in cleaning up polluted waters. Yet,
while substantial resources are devoted to restoring impaired waters, the Nation continues to
experience the loss of some of remaining healthy aquatic ecosystems.19 This is due to other significant
14 Read more on SWP at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index.cfm.
15 Read more on ground water at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/groundwater/index.cfm.
16 Read more on Small Systems at http://water.epa.gov/rvpe/drink/pws/smallsvstems/basicinformation.cfm.
17 Read more on Capacity Development at http://water.epa. gov/tvpe/drink/pws/smallsvstems/index.cfm.
18 Read more on water infrastructure sustainability at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/.
19 Heinz Center. State of the Nation's Ecosystems Report. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2008.
Office of Water Page 12 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
causes including habitat loss and fragmentation, hydrologic alteration and loss of connectivity, invasive
species, and climate change. The Healthy Watersheds Initiative20 (HWI) encourages a strategic, systems
approach to protecting healthy watersheds by working with states and other partners to implement
targeted and integrated protection approaches that recognize the dynamics and interconnectivity of
aquatic ecosystems in the landscape.21 In FY 2016- 2017, EPA will expand the protection of healthy
waters via a Healthy Watersheds Consortium Grant that will fund projects around the country while
leveraging non-federal dollars for healthy waters protection.
Supporting Green Infrastructure. EPA released a new Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda in October
2013 and has now provided more than $2.2 million in on-the-ground technical assistance to 39
communities to help with green infrastructure implementation (see Section III.Q. EPA has worked with
Council on Environmental Quality and other federal agencies to identify ways that the federal
government can make it easier for communities to implement green infrastructure. In the past year, EPA
has provided more than $1 million in on-the-ground technical assistance to 19 communities to help
them implement green infrastructure as part of our community partnership program. EPA is assisting
communities with green designs, benefits assessments, and code reviews. EPA has provided more than
$3 million for urban waters small grants, many of which support green initiatives. EPA also collaborates
with Department of Transportation (DOT), HUD, and USDA through its Partnership for Sustainable
Communities. More than $1 million of funding has been provided by EPA for its Greening America's
Capitals and Sustainable Communities Building Blocks technical assistance programs. To date, EPA's
CWSRF has provided more than $600 million for green infrastructure practices. EPA is also collaborating
with FEMA to advance the understanding of the benefits of green infrastructure in reducing the impact
of floods.
Supporting Sustainable Water Infrastructure. EPA is pursuing a Sustainable Infrastructure Program22,
designed to institutionalize practices by water and wastewater utilities that will help ensure the
sustainability of the communities these systems serve, and maximize the value of each infrastructure
dollar spent. The activities comprising the program are based on two basic tenets:
• To be sustainable as a community, you need sustainable infrastructure.
• To achieve sustainable water infrastructure, you need sustainable utilities.
To those ends, EPA is working to ensure that water infrastructure decisions also support other
community sustainability priorities. This will help provide more livable communities and reduce long-
term infrastructure needs and costs. EPA is working to promote effective and sustainable utility
management. Those efforts center around upfront planning that incorporates the assessment of life
cycle costs, innovative and green alternatives, and collateral environmental benefits into infrastructure
investment strategies, as well as the adoption of sustainable practices across a full range of utility
operations. EPA is also promoting the sustainability of water resources through its WaterSense Program,
which is focused on reducing consumer demand for water by developing specifications for products that
use less water than standard models and educating the public on the importance of water efficiency.
States are an important partner in EPA's efforts. EPA will continue to provide information to states,
including but not limited to the SRF programs, and encourage states to work with utilities to adopt
sustainable management practices in close collaboration with their communities.
20 Read more on the HWI at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm and in Section IILC.a.ii and
C.l.b.
21 U.S. EPA (2011). Healthy Watersheds Initiative: National Framework and Action Plan. Office of Water. EPA
841-R-l 1-005. Read more on HWI at http://water.epa. gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm.
22 Read more on the Sustainable Infrastructure Program at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/.
Office of Water Page 13 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
EPA will support the Build America initiative by focusing on financing innovation and public-private
partnerships, serving the needs of large, medium, and small water and wastewater systems as they
modernize. Areas of focus may include water and energy efficiency for utilities, water reuse, green
infrastructure, climate resiliency, and financing for small systems. EPA will also implement the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA), an innovative financing mechanism for water-related
infrastructure of national or regional significance. WIFIA will provide low interest loan financing for the
construction of water and wastewater infrastructure. Modern and resilient infrastructure will better
protect and improve public health, the natural environment, and economic vitality.
Sustainable Water Infrastructure is an integral part of the Sustainable Communities Partnership
between HUD, DOT, and EPA. EPA will continue working with the partners to integrate infrastructure
planning across water, housing, and transportation sectors to achieve the partnership goals.
Integrating Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Plans. Also discussed in Subobjective III.C. EPA has
formalized its commitment to integrated planning approaches to municipal wastewater and stormwater
management. An integrated planning process has the potential to identify a prioritized critical path to
achieving the water quality objectives of the CWA by identifying efficiencies in implementing competing
requirements that arise from separate wastewater and stormwater projects, including capital
investments and operation and maintenance requirements. This approach can also lead to use of more
sustainable and comprehensive solutions, such as green infrastructure, that improve water quality as
well as support other quality of life attributes that enhance the vitality of communities.
Rebuilding After Hurricane Sandy. Addressing the devastation that Hurricane Sandy wrought on the
residents of New Jersey and New York remains a high priority for EPA and will be achieved through close
coordination with EPA Region 2 and the affected states.
• EPA will work to administer DRAA funding in coordination with the DWSRF and CWSRF programs in
Region 2.
• The Agency will work closely with the States of New Jersey and New York to help increase the
resiliency of drinking water and wastewater infrastructure in both states to withstand the effects of
severe storms similar to Sandy.
Protecting Water Supplies. Source water protection can be undertaken on many scales, including
watersheds and aquifers. Opportunities to collaborate and take action exist at the national, regional,
state, and local levels. States are strongly encouraged to:
• Engage State Conservationists and local conservation districts to protect source waters from
nonpoint source (NPS) pollution, including through USDA funding opportunities and promotion of
land conservation programs and best management practices (BMPs) to protect water quality.
• Take collaborative actions that integrate CWA and SDWA source water protection activities to
advance public health and environmental protection objectives at the state, interstate and local
levels.
• Consider source water protection as part of storm water management in conjunction with green
infrastructure activities.
• Work with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) to maintain healthy land cover on federal lands to protect
water quality.
• Promote consideration of source water, including water availability, in efforts related to the effects
of climate change and other future pressures on fresh water resources.
• Use GIS tools, such as EPA's Drinking Water Mapping Application for Protecting Source Waters
Office of Water Page 14 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
(DWMAPS), to identify threats to drinking water sources and prioritize protective actions.
To support Capacity Development for drinking water systems, states will continue to work together
with EPA and other partners on a variety of activities:
• Sharing of tools, approaches, best practices, and innovations to promote sustainable practices,
including asset management23 and energy and water efficiency,24 in drinking water systems.
• Promoting the use of the Check Up Program for Small Systems (CUPSS) asset management
software.25
• Promoting EPA's Energy Use Assessment Tool26 for drinking water systems. Energy represents the
largest controllable cost of providing water or wastewater services to the public.
• Promoting water efficiency and strategies to reduce water loss. Given growing constraints on water
resources, cost of treatment, and aging infrastructure, it is increasingly important to focus on water
efficiency from a resource management and economic perspective.27
• Disseminating best practices and maintaining focus to assist non-CWSs, including campgrounds,
restaurants, and hospitals, in reliably providing safe drinking water.28
• Working with utilities and other partners (e.g., Department of Veterans Affairs) to address water
sector workforce recruitment and retention in support of a well-trained, knowledgeable workforce
to ensure safe drinking water and wastewater management.29
• Identifying opportunities to coordinate with other funding agencies (e.g., USDA Rural Development)
to more effectively assist small systems.
• Working with EPA and other partners to promote various forms of system partnerships, including
regionalization and shared treatment, that can provide opportunities for water systems to
collaborate on compliance solutions and operations and maintenance activities and share costs with
nearby systems, thereby enabling them to become sustainable and provide safe and affordable
water to their communities.30
• Working with EPA and other partners to build small system resiliency.
Green infrastructure activities include:
• EPA will continue work with other federal agencies to align programs and leverage available
resources to identify ways to make it easier for communities to implement green infrastructure. EPA
will continue to implement its Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda focused on providing
information and technical resources to communities.
• EPA intends to provide assistance to communities with green designs and benefits assessments.
• EPA will continue its work with its federal and external partners through it Urban Waters Program to
identify inter-agency and multi-stakeholder models for local success.
• EPA will continue developing opportunities for raising awareness of the CWSRF as a viable funding
source for green infrastructure projects.
Sustainable Water Infrastructure activities include:
23 Read more on Asset Management at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/asset management.cfm.
24 Read more on Water and Energy Efficiency at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/waterefficiencv.cfm.
25 Read more on CUPSS at http://www.epa.gov/cupss.
26 Read more on the Energy Use Assessment Tool at see http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/energy use.cfm.
27 Read more on water efficiency at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/main wpnew.cfm.
28 Read about Non-Community Water Systems at water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/pws/factoids.cfm.
29 Read more on Water Sector Workforce at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/ws workforce.cfm.
30 Read more on Water System Partnerships at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/partnerships.cfm.
Office of Water Page 15 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• EPA will continue to work with states and other partners under EPA's Decentralized Memorandum
of Understanding to promote better management practices for septic/decentralized systems.
• EPA will continue to work with designers, engineers, local communities, and other partners to
develop tools that help small communities evaluate appropriate wastewater infrastructure options.
• EPA will continue to work with HUD and DOT as part of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities
to coordinate federal housing, transportation, and other infrastructure investments to protect the
environment, promote equitable development, and help address the challenges of climate change.
• EPA will work with its federal partners to support the Build America initiative.
• EPA will implement the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA).
• SDW-SP4a and SDW-SP4b reflect, respectively, progress as defined by states in minimizing risks to
public health through source water protection for CWSs and for the percent of population served by
those systems.
• To support implementation of small system efforts, EPA tracks indicators for state DWSRF projects
targeting small systems (SDW-11) and small system noncompliance and their capacity to quickly
return to compliance with health-based standards (SDW-15).
• To reinforce the critical need of improving the protection of public health for people served by small
systems, EPA established a two-year Agency Priority Goal in FY 2012 aimed at engaging with twenty
states to improve small drinking water system capability through increased participation in EPA's
Optimization and Capacity Development Programs.31 EPA extended the APG in FY 2014-2015 to
reach more states and began piloting the approach with tribes.
• WQ-17 tracks the fund utilization rate (cumulative loan agreement dollars to the cumulative funds
available for projects) for the CWSRF.
As stated in the March 2011 memorandum, "Working in Partnership with States to Address Phosphorus
and Nitrogen Pollution through Use of a Framework for State Nutrient Reductions"32, EPA believes that
nitrogen and phosphorus pollution is one of the most serious and pervasive water quality problems.
Sources of nutrients present in water bodies are both natural and anthropogenic (human-influenced).
Human-induced nutrient pollution comes from a number of point and non-point sources including urban
stormwater runoff, municipal and industrial wastewater discharges, row crop agriculture, animal
feeding operations (AFOs) and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), and atmospheric
deposition. Controlling nutrient pollution from these sources requires holistic, integrated solutions that
emphasize accountability.
In FY 2016-2017, EPA will continue to collaborate with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) on the National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI). The NWQI aligns well with the NPS pollution
challenges and priorities in many states. The overall goal of the NWQI is for USDA-NRCS to assist
agricultural producers to improve water quality in small HUC-12 watersheds where this is a critical
concern. The NRCS has been providing five percent ($28-34 million) in financial assistance through the
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to address agriculture-related nutrient, sediment,
pathogen impairments in waters that are 303(d)-listed or otherwise impaired or threatened and
31 Read more on EPA's Small Systems Agency Priority Goal at http://goals.performance.gov/goal detail/EPA/366.
32 http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/nutrients/upload/memo nitrogen framework.pdf
Office of Water Page 16 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
consideration was given to impaired waters that are also sources of drinking water. States will provide
resources to monitor water quality progress in at least one NWQI watershed per state using CWA
Section 319 or other resources.
Under the NPDES permitting program, EPA and authorized states, tribes, and territories are required to
issue permits with effluent limits as well as other requirements (e.g. best management practices, water
quality trading, nutrient management plans, etc.) to protect water quality standards (WQS) to all point
sources discharging pollutants to any water of the U.S. This includes limits for nutrient pollution where
reasonable potential exists to cause or contribute to an excursion above WQS. EPA continues to work
with state and tribal partners to ensure effluent limits for nutrient pollution are included in permits
where necessary.
EPA water program managers should place a high priority on working with interested state
governments and other federal agencies, in collaboration with partners and stakeholders, to
accelerate near-term efforts to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. To this end, when
developing FY 2016-2017 Section 106 grant work plans, EPA regions and state partners should
specifically discuss what actions will be taken in FY 2016-2017 toward reducing nutrient pollution.
EPA water program managers should place a high priority on working with interested state
governments and other federal agencies, in collaboration with partners and stakeholders, to
accelerate near-term efforts to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. While EPA has a number
of tools and approaches available and states need room to innovate and respond to local water
quality needs, EPA has observed a framework consisting of a number of elements is vital to making
strong progress. To this end, when developing FY 2016-2017 Section 106 grant work plans, EPA
regions and state partners should specifically discuss what actions will be taken in FY 2014 toward
reducing nutrient pollution.
EPA encourages states to begin work immediately setting priorities on a watershed or statewide
basis, establishing nutrient reduction targets, and adopting numeric nutrient criteria for at least one
class of waterbodies by no later than 2016.
EPA will continue implementing the 319 program with a large number of projects focused on
reducing nutrient pollution from agricultural or urban/suburban sources.
EPA managers should continue working with states to ensure effective permitting of nutrient
pollution to protect state WQS.
WQ-Ola tracks the number of numeric WQS for total nitrogen and total phosphorus adopted by
states and territories and approved by EPA, or promulgated by EPA.
WQ-09a, b, and c track the reduction in runoff of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment. Because WQ-
09 deals with sediments as well as nutrients, it is further discussed under the section entitled,
"Implement Practices to Reduce Pollution from all Nonpoint Sources".
WQ-10 tracks progress in restoring waters identified on states' 303(d) impaired waters lists as
primarily impaired by NPSs. Because WQ-10 deals with pollutants in addition to nutrients, it is
further discussed under the section entitled, "Implement Practices to Reduce Pollution from all
Nonpoint Sources".
WQ-13d tracks the number of CAFOs permitted by an individual or general permit.
Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). Accurate, complete, and transparent system
Office of Water Page 17 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
performance data is essential in understanding how the nation's PWSs are faring in meeting the
expectation of delivering high quality safe drinking water to consumers. SDWIS33 serves as the primary
source of national information on system compliance with all health-based regulatory requirements of
SDWA and is used by most primacy agencies to assist in their management of the PWSS program.
Drinking Water Mapping Application for Protecting Source Waters (DWMAPS). Recent emergencies
and large-scale contamination events highlight the need to improve awareness of risks to drinking
water. DWMAPS is an internet-based geographic information systems (GIS) tool for drinking water
source water protection and assessment. While DWMAPS is currently a tool for EPA use, OGWDW is
working to provide availability of DWMAPS to state agencies, drinking water utilities, source water
collaboratives, watershed groups, and others. DWMAPS will include a nationwide mapping tool, a
customizable source water protection planning tool, and suite of data exchange services to help ensure
safe drinking water.
Developing E-Enterprise Solutions for Water Programs, SDWIS. EPA is replacing the existing SDWIS
State software34, with SDWIS Prime. EPA is leveraging E-Enterprise solutions in developing the next
generation of SDWIS in partnership with states in order to enhance and improve state program
management and enable better targeting of resources to systems in need; reduce the total cost of
ownership; enable faster implementation of drinking water rules and provide tools to ensure consistent
determinations for compliance with drinking water rules; and support efficient sharing of drinking water
compliance monitoring data between EPA, states, and the public.
Enhancing Access to Drinking Water System Compliance Information. In March 2010, EPA announced
the Drinking Water Strategy (Strategy)35, which envisions a comprehensive new approach to public
health protection under the SDWA and other federal statutes, including a call for EPA to partner with
states to share monitoring data collected and reported by PWSs to primacy agencies. Making these data
publicly available is intended to result in greater transparency into drinking water quality from the
national to the individual water system level, thereby increasing public awareness of status and trends
in drinking water quality and its importance to public health. EPA acknowledges the growing demand
from environmental agencies, public health agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the
public for access to a broader range of information about drinking water quality than is currently
available from EPA. Building on recent work between OGWDW and states, EPA is leveraging E-enterprise
solutions in developing a Compliance Monitoring Data Portal to facilitate the electronic transmission of
data between public water systems, laboratories and primacy agencies. Obtaining monitoring data
electronically from public water systems will reduce data reporting and entry burden for water systems,
laboratories, and states, and will facilitate more efficient sharing of data among EPA, states, and the
public.
Providing Accessible and Understandable Clean Water Data. EPA will continue to increase public
accessibility and understandability of water quality data and the effects of water quality on public health
and local economies. The Agency's goal is to simplify and automate reporting to raise awareness, reduce
burden, and increase transparency. EPA will support states' and tribes' management and use of water
quality data by improving automation of screening, analysis, visualization, and reporting of water quality
data to support priority setting, resource allocation for protection and restoration activities, and public
accountability. E-Enterprise solutions for clean water programs include tools to screen and analyze
water quality data available through the Storage and Retrieval Data Warehouse (STORE!)36 and the
33 Read more on SDWIS at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisfed/index.cfm.
34 Read more on SDWIS State at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisstate/aboutstate.cfm.
35 Read more on the Drinking Water Strategy at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/dwstrategv/index.cfm.
36 Read more on STORET at http://www.epa.gov/storet/.
Office of Water Page 18 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Water Quality data portal and expanded display of water quality information via How's My Waterway
website/app37.
In addition, EPA will continue to work with states and tribes to implement the Water Quality Framework
which is a new way of integrating EPA's data and information systems to more fully support water
quality managers. The Framework will streamline water quality assessment and reporting while
providing a more complete picture of the nation's water quality.
As EPA moves toward the development of an e-Enterprise solution for federal agencies, states, tribes,
territories, the regulated community, the Agency has identified projects under the NPDES program in
support of the Executive Order 13610, Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens, that will eliminate
paperwork burdens. Specifically, projects have been identified for piloting the electronic reporting of
CWA NPDES program data (e.g., Notice of Intent for general permits, Discharge Monitoring Report
(DMR) Data) and potential Clean Watersheds Needs Survey data using e-Enterprise solutions (e.g.,
internal and external shared services, fillable forms). The goal is to provide significant burden reduction
for permitting authorities, EPA, and the regulated community while giving the public more complete and
improved information about sources of water pollution in their communities. In FY 2016-2017, OW will
continue to work with OECA to make NPDES data more readily accessible to the public.
Drinking Water Information
1. States will participate in EPA-led development sessions to complete SDWIS Prime. During FY 2016
and FY 2017, states will also prepare to migrate data from SDWIS State and state-developed data
systems to SDWIS Prime.
2. States will partner with EPA in identifying cost-effective ways to leverage web technologies to
support laboratories, water systems, states and EPA as they manage, report, and utilize drinking
water data and to improve data quality.
Clean Water Information
• EPA will increase amount of water quality data state programs transmit to EPA via the Water Quality
Exchange (WQX).
• EPA will improve user access in the Water Quality data Portal to available analytical tools and
models.
• EPA will deliver National Aquatic Resource Survey results and data to the public and science
community.
• EPA will deliver a revised tool for submitting local assessment unit decisions and actions linked to
NHDPIus catchments.
• EPA will continue to work with states to incorporate electronic reporting approaches into
implementation of the NPDES Program, as discussed in more detail in the OECA draft NPM guidance.
Existing program measures do not track these activities. Implementation of the Drinking Water Strategy,
Compliance Monitoring Data Portal, and SDWIS Prime will, however, significantly affect how the data
that underlie the PWSS program's compliance measures are shared among EPA and state partners and
the transparency with which information about drinking water quality is made available to the public.
37 Access "How's My Waterway?" at http://watersgeo.epa.gov/mywaterwav/.
Office of Water Page 19 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
ill.
I
EPA is committed to protecting and restoring waters in Indian country and ANVs to ensure that drinking
water is safe and aquatic ecosystems sustain fish; plants and wildlife; and economic, recreational, and
subsistence activities. As outlined in the EPA FY2014-2018 Strategic Plan, the Agency will continue to
engage with tribes to build effective and results-oriented environmental programs. Consistent with the
Strategic Plan's Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy: Strengthening State, Tribal and International
Partnerships, OW will emphasize improving relationships with tribes through partnerships, outreach,
and consultation. In particular for FY 2016 and FY 2017, OW will implement tribal program strategies
and evaluate progress on actions in Indian country that support goals described in the EPA Strategic
Plan. EPA will evaluate progress using a set of National Water Program measures directly supporting
tribes. These measures are highlighted below and further described in Appendix A. EPA will also work
with tribes to improve environmental conditions and public health in communities overburdened by
environmental pollution in support of the Strategic Plan's Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy: Working
for Environmental Justice and Children's Health38.
EPA continues to work with tribes toward full implementation of water programs in Indian country (i.e.,
programs implemented by tribes or by EPA). EPA, in consultation with tribes, also works with states to
protect water resources outside of Indian country where tribes have rights, such as treaty guarantees of
resource protection. EPA's National Water Program recognizes that as sovereign entities and
environmental co-regulators, Indian tribes play a major role in protecting the water resources vital to
their existence, and many are seeking to develop comprehensive and effective water quality programs
to improve and protect water quality on tribal lands.
To support and enhance tribal efforts in FY 2016 and FY 2017, OW is taking many actions that include
tribes to protect water resources. These actions are described throughout this guidance, along with
other important information that may be of interest to tribes. Selected tribal activities are highlighted
here, and include:
• The National Water Program will continue to implement the EPA Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes39 using developed guidelines and best practices for OW to
coordinate and optimize tribal consultation efforts.
• Pursue planned rulemaking to:
o provide opportunities for tribes to more fully engage in the CWA Impaired Water Listing and
TMDL Program.
o streamline how tribes apply for treatment in a manner similar to a State (TAS) for the water
quality standards program and other Clean Water Act regulatory programs.
• Provide appropriate tools, including training and guidance documents, for implementing needed
tribal water programs.
• Continue to communicate CWA tribal training opportunities through a tribal listserv.
• Update OW's website to improve access to tribally-relevant information.
• Continue National Water Program management support and involvement at the highest levels.
38 Please see Protecting Populations at Risk, Section II. A. in this Guidance.
39 Read more on the EPA Policy at http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation/index.htm.
Office of Water Page 20 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Support the National Tribal Water Council (NTWC) to promote information exchange and technical
assistance among tribes to protect and restore water resources, and identify and analyze high-
priority water topics from a tribal perspective. The NTWC serves as a national forum for tribal water
managers to interact with each other, with tribes, and directly with EPA to promote actions that
improve ground, surface, and drinking water quality.
• Pursue new tribal strategic actions in the National Water Program's Strategy: Response to Climate
Change to support tribes' ability to preserve, adapt and maintain the viability of their culture,
traditions, natural resources, and economies in the face of a changing climate.
• Identify and focus available resources and provide technical assistance and guidance appropriately
to help tribes:
o Develop and implement water quality programs under the Final Guidance on Awards of
Grants to Indian tribes under CWA Section 106:
• Assist tribes in developing monitoring strategies appropriate to their water quality
programs through training and technical assistance and work with tribes to provide
data in a format accessible for storage in EPA data systems (measure WQ-06).
• Work with tribes to track improvements or where water quality is meeting
benchmark criteria and showing no degradation on tribal lands (measures WQ-
SP14a.Nll and WQ-SP14b.Nll).
• Implement any of the three approaches for protecting water quality contained in
the Final Guidance on Awards of Grants to Indian tribes under CWA Section 106,
regarding water quality standards. See Section III.C.I.a.i.
o Restore and improve water quality on a watershed basis. See Section III.C.I.b on HWI.
o Develop and manage NPS pollution programs (e.g. through watershed-based plans, BMPs,
and restoration activities). See Section III.C.I.a.v.
o Implement core elements of a wetlands program or a wetlands monitoring strategy.
o Adopt the fish tissue criterion for mercury that EPA issued in 2001 and apply it based on
implementation guidance. See Section III.B.2.
• Maintain OW's commitment to improve the provision of safe drinking water in Indian country by
working with PWSs to maintain and improve compliance with the NPDWRs and become more
resilient through use of infrastructure funding, technical assistance, and enforcement actions. See
Section III.B.l.a.
• Continue to work in partnership with the Indian Health Service (IMS), USDA, HUD, and BIA through
the Infrastructure Task Force (ITF) to increase access to safe water and basic sanitation.
• To support better management and maintenance of water systems on tribal lands, EPA will continue
to implement the National Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification program to ensure that
tribal water utility operators have the appropriate certification needed to provide safe drinking
water.
• The ANV Program, through the State of Alaska, will provide grant funds to under-served
communities to improve or to construct drinking water and wastewater facilities to improve local
health and sanitation conditions. The ANV Program will also support training and technical
assistance programs related to the TMF requirements of managing sanitation systems in rural
Alaska. See Section II.A.2.
• Support tribal projects in the Puget Sound and other large aquatic ecosystems. See Section III.D.5.
Office of Water Page 21 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Throughout 2006 - 2017, EPA worked with states and tribes to align and streamline performance
measures. The National Water Program will continue to actively engage states and tribes in the Agency's
performance measurement improvement efforts.
Water Safe to Drink: SDW-SP3.N11; SDW-18.N11; SDW-Olb; SDW-20.
Improved Water Quality on a Watershed Basis: WQ-SP14a.Nll; WQ-SP14b.Nll; WQ-02; WQ-03b; WQ-
12b; WQ-19b; WQ-23; WQ-24.N11.
Increase Wetlands: WT-SP22; WT-02a.
2. i >an
The goal of the Urban Waters Program40 is to help communities - particularly underserved communities
- access, restore, and benefit from their urban waters and the surrounding land. By promoting public
access to urban waters, EPA will help communities become active participants in the enjoyment,
restoration, and protection of these urban waters. By linking water to other community priorities, EPA
will help make the condition of these waters more relevant to nearby communities and help to sustain
their involvement over the time horizon needed for water quality improvement.
State, tribal, and local government agencies are encouraged to build on their existing partnerships and
develop new partnerships among appropriate state programs and with non-profits, private sector,
academia and community groups, especially those addressing EJ concerns around activities that advance
local urban water quality protection and restoration goals. The Urban Waters Program anticipates the
following activities in FY 2016 and FY 2017:
• Continue to play an active role as a member of the Urban Waters Federal Partnership41 and facilitate
the meetings of the national Partnership Workgroup. Work with partners, including the non-
governmental organization and association members, to align resources, funding, and expertise to
restore urban waters and revitalize the communities that surround them. Identify new key partners
to increase support to communities. Support existing Urban Waters Federal Partnership locations.
• Support the award of Urban Waters Small Grants42 that will advance the restoration of urban waters
through activities that also support community revitalization and local priorities. Grants support
activities such as green infrastructure, water quality monitoring and local watershed planning.
• Support to EPA grantees will continue through the Urban Waters Learning, a virtual forum for peer-
to-peer learning, exchanging ideas and best practices, and sharing technical expertise. The Urban
Waters Learning Network receives its funding from EPA Urban Waters Program43.
• Continue to support the Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration Grant Program, a public/private
grant program managed by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, by encouraging broad
participation among the Urban Waters Federal Partnership to launch a fourth round of grant
opportunities. EPA provides funding to this grant program. Modest funding from several agencies
can leverage private funds and expanded commitment to improving urban water quality goals.44
40 Read more on the Urban Waters Program at http://www2.epa.gov/urbanwaters.
41 More information is at http://www.urbanwaters.gov/.
42 More information is at http://www2.epa.gov/urbanwaters/urban-waters-small-grants.
43 More information is at http://www2.epa.gov/urbanwaters/urban-waters-learning-network.
44 More information is at http://www.nfwf.org/fivestar/Pages/home.aspx.
Office of Water Page 22 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Continue to collaborate with community-based programs across the Agency leveraging authorities
and technical resources to maximize the effectiveness of all programs.
Areas of activity may include green infrastructure, source water protection, water sector workforce
development, watershed planning, land revitalization, water quality monitoring and assessment.
WQ-25a tracks the number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in the
community.
WQ-25b tracks the number of urban waters projects completed.
3, UllT13t6 *w>tl3ini€G
A changing climate will have significant impacts on water resources and pose difficult challenges for
water program managers at federal, state, and local levels. Sustaining improvements in water quality
and improving water quality conditions will require the National Water Program to successfully
implement a comprehensive and effective response to climate change. In addition, the National Water
Program will expand efforts to reduce greenhouse gases associated with water management and
strengthen efforts to protect and expand the capacity of aquatic resources to sequester carbon.
In December 2012, the National Water Program published the National Water Program 2012 Strategy:
Response to Climate Change45 which builds on an earlier strategy released in 2008. The 2012 Strategy
documents the diversity and seriousness of climate change impacts on water resources, describes long-
term goals for protecting water resources for future generations, and provides the framework for the
water elements of the EPA Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plans published by the Office of
Water and EPA Regional Offices in November of 2014.
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, the National Water Program will expand efforts to assure that core clean water
and safe drinking water programs are adapting to a changing climate. Some key activities are described
below.
• National program offices at EPA headquarters and water programs at EPA regional offices will
continue implementing priority actions identified in the Climate Change Adaptation
Implementation Plans46 including:
o Work with states and water utilities to prepare for a changing climate and more
extreme weather events by promoting the use of the Climate Resilience Evaluation and
Awareness Tool (GREAT), identifying water facilities on the Gulf and Atlantic coasts at
risk from storm surges, and supporting extreme events workshops;
o Promote wide delivery of training for EPA, state, and local government water program
managers on climate change developed in 2014-2015;
o Expand national and EPA regional office activities to communicate climate change and
water resources information to stakeholders and the public;
o Strengthen collaboration on climate change among the National Water Program and
other EPA offices (e.g.; Office of Research and Development, Office of Air and Radiation,
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance); and
45 Read more at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/climatechange/2012-National-Water-Program-Strategv.cfm.
46 See: http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs/EPA-impl-plans.html')
Office of Water Page 23 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
o Build stronger, mutually supporting relationships on climate change challenges among
EPA water programs and related programs of other federal agencies (e.g.; National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, and Department of Agriculture).
• EPA will work with state, tribal, and local governments to operationalize climate-related
adjustments to water programs identified as a result of climate policy development initiatives
during 2014 and 2015 including:
o Consider climate change impacts in triennial reviews of State water quality standards;
o Implement updated NPDES permit tools and training related to climate change, with a
focus on stream flow, precipitation, and water temperature;
o Update state water quality management plans to describe changes to coastal and
freshwater systems in the state likely to occur as a result of a changing climate and
adjust program management policies and practices as needed; and
o Address climate change in community drinking water system sanitary surveys.
• EPA will expand efforts to support place-based assessments of water resource vulnerability to
climate change and development of risk-based response strategies. Key elements of this work
will include:
o Encourage states and watershed organizations to use the newly published workbook for
climate adaptation planning at the watershed level (see: Being Prepared for Climate
Change: A Workbook for Developing Risk-Based Adaptation Plans47;
o Support investments by National Estuary Programs in work to recognize climate change
impacts and revise Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans as appropriate;
and
o Recognize and address climate change challenges facing programs to protect Great
Waterbodies, including the Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, and Gulf of Mexico, as well as
large aquatic ecosystems.
In addition, the National Water Program will expand and strengthen efforts to reduce the release of
greenhouse gases associated with water management and expand the capacity of aquatic resources to
sequester carbon. Key activities in FY 2016-2017 will include:
• Expand the WaterSense program to improve water use efficiency and thereby reduce energy
used to pump and treat water; and
• Develop and pilot methods to assess the carbon sequestration functions of aquatic resources
(e.g.; wetlands, mangroves, and sea grasses) and promote program management practices that
protect and enhance carbon sequestration.
Climate Change Performance Measures
For FY 2016-2017, EPA is proposing program measures related to the progress of water programs in
adapting to a changing climate and two measures related to reducing release of greenhouse gases and
sequestering carbon. These measures support "Goal 1: Objective 1.1: Address Climate Change" in the
EPA 2014-2018 Strategic Plan.
Measures relating to adapting clean water programs to be effective as the climate changes include:
47 See: http://www2.epa.gov/cre^eing-prepared-climate-change-workbook-developing-risk-based-adaptation-plans
Office of Water Page 24 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Number of NPDES State permit programs that have adopted updated models and tools related
to hydrologic variability for development of new permits.
• Number of projects funded by water State Revolving Loan Fund programs that implement
climate change adaptation.
Measures supporting the Strategic Plan goal of reducing greenhouse gas releases include:
• Number of WaterSense partners working to improve water use efficiency.
4,
Innovative technology can play a significant role in solving many of the water-related problems facing
the U.S. and also providing opportunities for economic development. The preponderance of evidence
demonstrates that environmental protection and economic progress go hand-in-hand. President Obama
said that the U.S. will win the future by out educating, out innovating, and out building competitors48.
OW is committed to fostering and institutionalizing consideration, adoption and use of innovative
technology to advance EPA's goal of clean and safe water across the entire spectrum of the water
program. This will be done in close cooperation with EPA regions, states, tribes, and other partners. An
innovative technology priority list was created, in no particular order, that presents opportunities to
achieve significant reductions in cost and energy consumption enhance the attainment of clean and safe
water, substantially faster and cheaper, and foster job creation for the economy:
• Increased focus on advancing sustainability.
• Develop innovative techniques and tools to maintain healthy watersheds and improve watershed
health.
• Advance technologies and techniques to restore water bodies that do not meet WQSs.
• Develop innovative methods to address nutrient pollution.
• Continue development of innovation (next generation) municipal, industrial, and drinking water
treatment technologies and system designs.
• Focus on development testing and implementation of wet weather quantity and quality controls.
• Develop alternative test methods for effective and less expensive monitoring.
• Continue development of more efficient and cost-effective information technology systems to
promote sustainable system operation, maintenance, and planning.
• Develop more efficient and cost-effective methods for assessing and rehabilitating and retrofitting
wastewater, drinking water, and storm water infrastructure.
• Identify opportunities and approaches for institutionalizing innovation throughout OW programs.
• Evaluate financing innovations to support investments that improve water infrastructure.
• Develop methods to ensure that innovative approaches focus on protection and preservation of
natural ecosystems.
• Develop methods related to technology assessment and verification performance.
The previous Acting Assistant Administrator for OW, Nancy Stoner, released a Technology Innovation
Blueprint49, which identifies the actions, challenges, and the path forward to employ the above priority
list in assisting with current water resource issues.
48 Read more on the vision for technology innovation at http://www2.epa.gov/envirofinance/innovation.
49 Read more on OW's blueprint for technology innovation at http://water.epa.gov/blueprint.cfm.
Office of Water Page 25 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
EPA water program will assemble a technology innovation work group to help foster technology
innovation throughout OW, as well as lead efforts to identify specific opportunities within programs.
EPA water program will assess all programs and initiatives to identify where opportunities exist to
leverage technology innovation.
EPA water program will address potential barriers that must be addressed to ensure successful
implementation.
EPA water program will ensure the use of innovative technology as a means to address current
program priorities.
OW 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 Guidance.
OW 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 5700.5A150, effective January 15, 2005,
applies to: (1) competitive announcements issued, released, or posted after January 14, 2005; (2)
assistance agreement competitions, awards, and disputes based on competitive announcements issued,
released, or posted after January 14, 2005; (3) non-competitive awards resulting from non-competitive
funding recommendations submitted to a Grants Management Office after January 14, 2005; and (4)
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 OMB standard
formatting requirements for federal agency announcements of funding opportunities and OMB
requirements related to Grants.gov51, which is the official federal government website where applicants
can find and apply to funding opportunities from all federal grant-making agencies.
On October 12, 2011, Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD) issued a memorandum approving a
competition exemption for awards to non-profit co-regulator/co-implementor organizations (collectively
referred to as "co-regulator organizations") for core co-regulator organization type activities funded
50 Read more at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/competition/5700 5 a 1 final order 2 11 14.pdf.
51 Access Grants.gov at http://www.grants.gov.
Office of Water Page 26 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
with State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) categorical appropriations under the associated program
support cost authority. The competition exemption only applies to certain STAG funded awards and is
subject to several conditions. For EPA to use STAG funding under the associated program support cost
authority, the activities funded must support the environmental protection programs of non-federal
governmental partners and the services the co-regulator organizations provide must be for the direct
use and of primary benefit of these entities and not EPA. For the funds that would otherwise be allotted
to state governmental entities, EPA policy requires that EPA obtain the prior approval of the affected
state agency or department before such funding is used for awards to co-regulator organizations for
associated program support on their behalf.
On June 2, 2011, the Administrator issued the "U.S. EPA Policy Statement on Climate Change
Adaptation" which affirmed the Agency's commitment to anticipate and plan for future changes in
climate and incorporate them into our programs, policies and operations. Subsequently, OGD and OP
issued a memorandum on October 18, 2011, requesting EPA headquarters and regional program offices
to work to incorporate climate change considerations into applicable competitive funding opportunities
where the outcomes of the project are sensitive to climate or where the project could be more effective
if climate change were addressed.
OW is required to develop and carry out a post-award monitoring plan and conduct baseline monitoring
for every award. EPA Order 5700.6A2, 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 DIG. Baseline monitoring
activities must be documented in the Post-Award Database in the Integrated Grants Management
System (IGMS). Advanced monitoring activities must be documented in the official grant file and the
Grantee Compliance Database in IGMS.
Project officers of assistance agreements participate in a wide range of pre-and post-award activities.
OGD issued Guidance for Assessing Grants Management and the Management of Interagency
Agreements under the Performance Appraisal and Recognition System (PARS) on September 29, 2014 to
be used for 2014 PARS appraisals of project officers who are managing at least one active grant during
the rating period, and their supervisors/managers. The memo also provides guidance for the
development of 2015 performance agreements. OW supports the requirement that project officers and
their supervisors/managers assess grants management responsibilities through the Agency's PARS
process.
Office of Water Page 27 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
The Agency's long-term goal is for EPA and states to achieve greater consistency in workplan formats. To
achieve that goal, on January 24, 2011, OGD issued Grants Policy Issuance (GPI) 11-03 State Grant
Workplans and Progress Reports52. The GPI requires that workplans and associated progress reports for
14 identified state categorical grant programs prominently display three Essential Elements (the
Strategic Plan Goal; the Strategic Plan Objective; and the Workplan Commitments plus time frame) to
further accountability, strategic plan alignment, and consistent performance reporting. A database (i.e.,
State Grant IT Application53) to electronically store workplans and progress reports for the 14 identified
state categorical grant programs was made available December 3, 2012.
On September 21, 2012, OGD issued GPI 12-06 Timely Obligation, Award and Expenditure of EPA Grant
Funds54. The GPI establishes policies to streamline grant processes and improve grant outlay rates.
Section 7.0 of the GPI establishes streamlining principles for 16 identified state categorical grant
programs. The streamlining principles apply to the workplan negotiation phase, the application phase,
and the award phase.
For each of the key subobjectives related to water addressed in the EPA Strategic Plan and this
Guidance, EPA has worked with states, tribes, and other stakeholders to define strategies for
accomplishing the improvements in the environment or public health identified for the subobjective.
52 Read more at http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/policv/fmal grants_policv issuance 11 03 state grant_workplans.pdf.
53 Available at https://ofmext.epa.gov/apex/sgita/f?p=SGITA:Home:.
54 Read more at http ://intranet. epa. gov/ogd/policv/gpi 12 06 timely obligation.pdf.
Office of Water Page 28 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
This Guidance draws from the Strategic Plan, but describes plans and strategies at a more operational
level and focuses on FY 2014.
"I, Water to Drink
The fundamental public health protection mission of the national drinking water program55 is to ensure
that PWSs deliver drinking water that meets national primary drinking water standards to their
customers. The protection of the Nation's public health through safe drinking water has been the shared
responsibility of EPA, states, and tribes for more than 35 years. Currently, 51,535 CWSs56 nationwide
supply drinking water to more than 300 million Americans (approximately 95% of the U.S. population).
The development and implementation of health protection-based regulatory standards for drinking
water quality to limit human exposure to contaminants of concern is the cornerstone of the program.
a. Core are Critical to
Drinking
Collectively, these six core areas of the national safe drinking water program comprise a comprehensive
approach to protecting public health.
i. Development/Revision of Drinking Water Standards/Regulations. SDWA requires the Agency to
develop a list of unregulated contaminants that are known or anticipated to occur in PWSs and may
require regulation. This list is known as the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL)57 and the Agency is
required to publish this list every five years. SDWA also requires the Agency to determine whether to
regulate at least five CCL contaminants with a NPDWR58 using three statutory criteria. Like CCL, the
regulatory determinations process is also on a five year cycle.
Development or Revision of Drinking Water Standards Activities for FY 2016-2017
The Agency will continue to address the development or revision of drinking water standards to protect
human health in FY 2016-2017 and will work with states and tribes to:
• Provide technical and scientific support for the development of drinking water regulations. State
representatives (co-regulators) often participate with EPA personnel in the regulatory development
work groups that develop drinking water regulations.
• Implementation of the third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR3)59; as reporting,
analysis, and posting of monitoring results will continue through mid-2016.
• Develop the final rule to support the collection of drinking water contaminant occurrence data
under the next cycle of the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4). Review, analyze,
and address the public comments received in response to the proposed UCMR 4 published in 2015,
and publish the final rule in 2017. Work with states, laboratories, and public water systems
throughout 2017 to prepare for the 2018-2020 monitoring. This SDWA required effort is conducted
every five years.
55 Read more on drinking water at http://water, epa. gov/drink/.
56 Although SDWA applies to 156,539 public water systems nationwide (as of October 2012), which include
schools, hospitals, factories, campgrounds, motels, gas stations, etc. that have their own water system, this measure
focuses only on CWSs. A CWS is a public water system that provides water to the same population year-round. As
of October 2014, there were 51,535 CWSs. EPA also continues to focus attention on addressing compliance and
sustainability challenges faced by non-CWSs.
57 Read more on CCLs at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/dws/ccl/.
58 Read more on NPDWRs at http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm.
59 Read more on UCMR3 at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/ucmr3/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 29 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Provide technical and scientific support that includes development and validation of analytical
methods for updating rules and implementing the UCMR, training and supporting states in their
oversight of Cryptosporidium laboratories, and responding to technical implementation questions
regarding the entire range of NPDWRs.
• Conclude the compilation and to evaluation of new information on health effects, occurrence,
treatment technologies, and other information for regulated contaminants and publish the third Six-
Year Review (in 2016) that identifies, prioritizes, and targets those regulations for revision that are
most likely to result in meaningful opportunities for health risk reduction and/or cost savings to
PWSs and their customers while maintaining or providing for greater levels of public health
protection. This SDWA required effort is conducted every six years.
• Evaluate and utilize the input received from ORD and U.S. Food and Drug Administration scientists
that addressed Science Advisory Board recommendations regarding data collection and the review
and development of PBPK/PD models to relate perchlorate exposure to biological effects
"downstream" from the inhibition of iodide uptake. EPA will publish the proposed regulation and
analyses for public review and comment in 2016 and promulgate the final rule in 2017.
• Review and evaluate monitoring data from UCMR 3, collected during 2013-2015, regarding
carcinogenic volatile organic compounds (cVOCs). EPA expects to propose a cVOCs Group Regulation
in 2018. This group of up to 16 contaminants includes trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene
(PCE), and other regulated and unregulated carcinogenic volatile contaminants.
• Propose a rule in 2016 that makes conforming changes to existing regulations based on the
Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act (RLDWA), which was enacted in 2011, and, as such, affects
the use and introduction into commerce of lead pipes, plumbing fittings or fixtures, and solder and
flux. The RLDWA redefined "lead-free" in SDWA to lower the maximum content of lead, establish a
method to calculate lead content, and eliminate the requirement that lead-free products be in
compliance with voluntary third party standards for leaching of lead.
• Collaborate with stakeholders, scientists, and the public to undertake the highest priority research
and information collection activities to better understand water quality issues.
• Explore how best to address issues identified about the inspection, cleanliness, health risks, and
safety of finished drinking water storage facilities (e.g. storage tanks).
• Fostering the development of new drinking water technologies to address health risks posed by a
broad array of contaminants in support of the Drinking Water Strategy.
ii. Implementation of Drinking Water Standards/Regulations and Technical Assistance. The
implementation of programs designed to assist PWSs in complying with drinking water regulations is
essential to EPA's core mission of protecting public health in the U.S.
Development/Revision of Drinking Water Standards/Regulations Activities for 2016-2017
EPA will work in concert with states and tribes to facilitate PWS compliance with drinking water
regulations through a variety of activities:
• Conduct Sanitary Surveys60: States, tribes, and EPA direct implementation programs will conduct
sanitary surveys at PWSs according to the schedules set forth in the Interim Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule and in the Ground Water Rule, which in FY 2014 was included for the first time in
measures SDW-Ola and SDWA-Olb. Primacy agencies should work with water systems to resolve
significant deficiencies identified during sanitary surveys as quickly as possible.
60 Read more on sanitary surveys at http://water.epa.gov/learn/training/dwatraining/sanitarvsurvev/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 30 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Conduct Technical Assistance and Training61: States, tribes, and EPA direct implementation
programs should focus their assistance to water systems to address their implementation
challenges, particularly with the Revised Total Coliform Rule, Ground Water Rule62 and the Stage 2
Disinfection/Disinfection By-Products Rule63. Primacy agencies will need to assist small water
systems transitioning to locational running annual average compliance and provide education on the
new requirements and assistance to consecutive systems that may be monitoring for the first time.
Primacy agencies should also monitor systems to follow up with any identified steps to minimize
exceedances in the future.
• Participate in Area-wide Optimization Program (AWOP) Activities: EPA's AWOP64, which provides
compliance assistance to drinking water systems, continues to work with systems and states to
develop and implement a variety of approaches to improve water system performance.
Optimization tools include comprehensive performance evaluations (CPEs) to assess the
performance of filtration technology and distribution system optimization (DSO) techniques.
• Participate in the Drinking Water Laboratory Certification Program: EPA will continue the program
that sets standards and establishes methods for EPA, state, tribal, and privately-owned laboratories
that analyze drinking water samples. Through this program, EPA headquarters conducts EPA
regional program reviews, visiting each EPA regional office on a triennial basis, and evaluates
oversight of state laboratories and the state laboratory certification programs within regional
purview. In addition, EPA annually delivers a minimum of three (1. Chemistry, 2. Microbiology, and
3. Cryptosporidium) Certification Officer Training courses for state and regional representatives.
• Submit data to the federal SDWIS to support effective PWSS program implementation: Primacy
agencies are required to provide timely, accurate, and complete inventory, violations, and
enforcement data to SDWIS. Primacy agencies may do this through the SDWIS State software
developed by EPA to provide support for state implementation of the PWSS program65 or through
submission of files through the State-EPA Exchange Network to SDWIS Fed.
• Coordinate with Enforcement: States and EPA regions with direct implementation for PWSS
programs will work with their enforcement counterparts and with EPA to identify instances of actual
or expected non-compliance that pose risks to public health and will take appropriate actions as
necessary. EPA regional offices and OW will continue to work with OECA. Collaboration across the
drinking water program is critical to ensuring that PWSs with compliance issues are addressed
through the most effective means, including targeted funding, compliance assistance and
enforcement.
iii. DWSRF66 and Sustainable Water Infrastructure. EPA's drinking water program is emphasizing several
national SRF priorities to strengthen the program for the long-term. These include increasing the speed
with which appropriated funds move to projects; ensuring that the highest priority projects are ready to
proceed to funding; reducing unliquidated obligations within state DWSRF programs, ensuring the
financial integrity of the program through strong auditing, consistent with overarching federal law and
guidance; and enhancing coordination between the DWSRF and PWSS programs.
61 Read more on EPA's training on the National Primary Drinking Water Rules at
http://water.epa.gov/learn/training/dwatraining/index.cfm.
62 Read more on the Groundwater Rule (GWR) at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/gwr/index.cfm.
63 Read more on the Stage 2 DBF rule at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/stage2/index.cfm.
64 Read more on AWOP at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/pws/optimization/index.cfm.
65 Read more on SDWIS State at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisstate/aboutstate.cfm.
66 Read more on DWSRF at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 31 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
DWSRF and Sustainable Water Infrastructure Activities for 2016-2017
States are expected to:
• Apply for their capitalization grant in the first year of availability to facilitate earlier use of funds for
project financing.
• Provide plans for financing projects not yet started under open grants from years prior to 2013.
• Report fund utilization67 for projects (see Program Activity Measure SDW-04) and the number of
projects that have initiated operations (see Program Activity Measure SDW-05).
• Receive DWSRF monies based on the 2011 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey68 of
approximately 52,000 CWSs and 21,400 not-for-profit non-CWSs.
• Use the program's new model Intended Use Plan (IUP)69 reflecting required elements to prepare the
state grant application.
• Give adequate consideration to funding preliminary design for projects to be ready for construction
financing.
• Continue implementation of the SRF Sustainability Policy70 to promote water system technical,
managerial, and financial capacity as a critical means to meet infrastructure needs and further
enhance program performance and efficiency and to ensure compliance. State programs can utilize
DWSRF set-asides to promote asset management, system-wide planning, and other sustainable
management practices at PWSs aimed at reducing water loss and better understanding linkages
between water production/distribution and energy use.71
• Coordinate across drinking water programs, including the PWSS, source water protection, capacity
development, and operator certification, in order to identify systems in noncompliance with SDWA
requirements or challenged to be sustainable, and then provide loans and/or technical assistance to
improve their capacity to provide safe drinking water.
• Encourage the use of set-asides for source water protection activities, where appropriate. Effective
source water protection has the potential to off-set the need for infrastructure upgrades and
additional treatment costs.
iv. Water System Security72. Since the events of 9/11, EPA has been designated as the sector-specific
Agency responsible for infrastructure protection activities for the Nation's drinking water and
wastewater systems. EPA is utilizing its position within the water sector and working with its
stakeholders to provide information to help protect the Nation's drinking water supply from terrorist
threats and all hazard events.
Water System Security Activities for FY 2016-2017
As required by Executive Order (EO) 13636, Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, EPA will
work with DHS, as well as the Water Sector Coordinating Council and Water Government Coordinating
Council, to encourage water and wastewater utilities to use the Cybersecurity Framework and
67 Read more on the fund utilization rate at
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/memos/memo dwsrf_policv 2003-02-25.pdf.
68 Read more on the Needs Survey at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/dwns/index.cfm.
69 Read more on intended use plans at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2000-08-07/html/00-19783.htm.
70 Read more on the SRF Sustainability Policy at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/Clean-Water-and-
Drinking-Water-Infrastructure-Sustainabilitv-Policv.cfm.
71 Read more on set-aside use to promote capacity development at
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/techas.pdf. http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrfypdfs/capdev.pdf.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsri7pdfs/opcert.pdf.
72 Read more on water system security at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 32 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
participate in the DHS Voluntary Program for Framework implementation.
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA will continue to fulfill its requirements under Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 9 by progressing to the next phase of the Water Security Initiative (WSI)73 pilot
program and the Water Laboratory Alliance (WLA). EPA will, in collaboration with our regional
counterparts, states, and utilities:
• Issue the System Response Surveillance System Framework, which will assist drinking water utilities
with assessing and enhancing their capabilities for early detection of and response to water
contamination and other water quality problems.
• Initiate a national outreach strategy under WSI to encourage water utilities to adopt effective,
implementable, and sustainable contamination warning system practices. This strategy will include
in-person training sessions throughout the country and guidance materials for water utilities on
designing, deploying, and testing contamination warning systems based on lessons learned from the
pilots.
• Plan exercises designed to further implement the WLA Response Plan which provides processes and
procedures for a coordinated laboratory response to water contamination incidents.
• Expand membership in the WLA to include water utilities that need access to laboratory analytical
services during an unintentional or intentional contamination event, but that are ineligible under
the current WLA membership criteria due to their limited in-house laboratory capabilities.
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA will continue collaboration with our regional counterparts, states, the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and water sector officials to:
• Improve the use of intrastate and interstate mutual aid to restore utility operations more quickly by
supporting tabletop exercises and improvement planning.
• Provide training and tools for water utilities to better understand their emergency response roles
and responsibilities and integrate preparedness activities into their daily operations with user-
friendly templates and free and easily accessible online training.
• Provide technical assistance to state/local governments on coordinating the recovery of and
integrating resiliency into drinking water and wastewater infrastructure systems.
• Plan and conduct series of extreme weather event workshops with Atlantic coastal communities.
These workshops would address both short term emergency preparedness and long term planning.
• Promote awareness and adoption of drinking water and wastewater preparedness and resiliency
programs throughout the Nation to further Agency priorities and the interests, needs, and priorities
of stakeholders through outreach efforts at water sector, and other interdependent sectors
conferences and exhibits.
• Develop and conduct webcasts and exercises to prepare utilities, emergency responders, and
decision-makers to evaluate and respond to physical, cyber, and contamination threats and events;
• Create, update, and disseminate tools and provide technical assistance to ensure that water and
wastewater utilities and emergency responders react rapidly and effectively to intentional
contamination and natural disasters.
• Sustain and improve the operation of the Water Desk in the Agency's Emergency Operations Center
by updating roles/responsibilities, improving internal communications, training staff in the incident
command structure, ensuring adequate staffing during activation of the desk, and coordinating with
EPA regional field personnel and response partners.
• Refine and provide outreach and training on a risk assessment tool that will enable utilities to
address the risks from all hazards, including climate change impacts.
73 Read more on WSI at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/lawsregs/initiative.cfm.
Office of Water Page 33 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Under the Climate Ready Water Utilities initiative, continue to update practical tools and training
that enable drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities, particularly in hurricane prone
regions, to integrate resiliency to climate change into short and long term planning.
v. Source Water Protection Programs74. See National Water Program Area of Focus in Section II.C,
Protecting Drinking Water Supplies. EPA's source water protection program aims to prevent
contamination from reaching sources of drinking water. The prevalence of emerging contaminants as
well as chemical spill and contamination emergencies highlight the need to protect watersheds
upstream of drinking water supplies.
Source Water Activities for FY 2016-2017:
• Develop the Drinking Water Mapping Application for Protecting Source Waters (DWMAPS), a web-
based GIS system for tracking potential sources of contamination (both point and nonpoint sources)
upstream of PWSs. DWMAPS will also include tools to facilitate updates to Source Water
Assessments, and training resources for applying these tools to state and local drinking water
concerns.
• Promote integration of the CWA and SDWA to identify and achieve mutual clean water and safe
drinking water goals. Work with states and other stakeholders to promote actions outlined in the
state-EPA collaborative toolkit, Opportunities to Protect Drinking Water Sources and Advance
Watershed Goals through the CWA.
• Work with partners in the Source Water Collaborative to promote actions toward reducing nonpoint
and point sources of contamination in drinking water.
vi. Underground Injection Control75. SDWA requires EPA to develop minimum federal requirements for
UIC programs that address well construction, permitting, operation, and closure in order to protect
public health by preventing injection wells from contaminating underground sources of drinking water
(USDW).
UIC Activities for FY 2016-2017
EPA will work in concert with states and tries to facilitate UIC compliance through a variety of activities,
including:
• Implementing the UIC programs for well classes I - V to ensure that injection wells are permitted
and operated in a manner that protects USDWs from endangerment. (See measures SDW-07 and
SDW-08.)
• Submitting well-specific data for well classes I - V to the UIC National Database.
• For state programs seeking primacy for the Class VI well program, developing complete primacy
applications for the Class VI well program and working with EPA to refine and revise their Class VI
primacy applications as needed after submission. States will work with permit applicants upon
obtaining primacy and EPA will work to transition any issued Class VI permits over to the state once
primacy has been granted. (See measures SDW-19a and SDW-19b.)
• Working towards a consistent and predictable process for the review of aquifer exemption requests
under SDWA.
• Ensure that hydraulic fracturing using diesel fuels are authorized under the applicable UIC program.
74 Read more on SWP at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index.cfm.
75 Read more on UIC at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/groundwater/uic/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 34 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
See National Water Program Area of Focus in Section II.C. Improving Small System Capacity.
EPA manages the following three grant programs to the states and tribes, authorized under SDWA, to
support the implementation of the drinking water core program and achieve EPA's strategic goals
related to drinking water. Below are the grant guidances for FY 2014.
The PWSS program is fundamental to the implementation of SDWA and EPA and state's role in the
protection of public health. The memo entitled Guidance and Tentative Grant Allotments to Support
Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Programs on Tribal Lands, provided in 2008, continues to apply
in FY 2016-2017 to EPA regions that receive tribal PWSS funding to support the Tribal Drinking Water
Program. This Guidance for FY 2014 includes guidance for state, territories, and tribal recipients of PWSS
program grants, as well as for EPA regions with primacy enforcement authority. Grant recipients are
expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives, subobjectives, strategic
targets, and PAMs specified in Safe Drinking Water Section of this Guidance. In addition, grant recipients
should be focused on preserving the gains of the previous years' efforts and striving to build upon them
to the extent possible.
The overall objective of the PWSS grant program76 is to protect public health by ensuring that:
• PWSs, of all types and sizes, that are currently in compliance, remain in compliance;
• PWSs, of all types and sizes, that are not currently in compliance, achieve compliance;
• PWSs, of all types and sizes, are preparing to comply with new drinking water regulations that will
be taking effect in FY 2016.
Assisting PWSs in meeting this objective and achieving long-term sustainability requires grantees to
adopt a variety of approaches and coordinate efforts across the drinking water program.
PWSS Grant Activities for FY 2016-2017
Building on the ongoing efforts of grantees to implement the PWSS program, FY 2016-2017 priority
activities for the PWSS grantees should include the following:
• Timely submission of primacy program revisions for the purpose of adopting new or revised
federal regulations;
• Completion of sanitary surveys;
• Microbial and Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts rules implementation, including the
Revised Total Coliform Rule, Ground Water Rule, the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection
Byproducts Rule, and the Long-term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule;
• Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act implementation;
• Addressing arsenic and nitrate non-compliance;
• Consideration of climate effects on PWSs; and
• Technical and compliance assistance to PWSs to ensure the reliable delivery of safe water.
76 Read more on the PWSS Grant Program at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/pws/index.cfm and the Tribal
PWSS Grant Program at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/pws/allotments tribal fs.cfm.
Office of Water Page 35 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
A proportion of each PWSS grant should be devoted to ensuring that data are effectively managed and
that required data are submitted to EPA. Specifically that:
• Water system compliance determinations are consistent with federal and state regulations;
• Corrective actions associated with data file reviews are implemented; and
• PWSS grantees submit to EPA the required inventory, compliance, and enforcement data. This
data should be timely, accurate, and complete.
The PWSS grant allotments are based on factors such as population, geographic area, and PWSs
inventory. State-by-state allotments and the total amount available to each region for its tribal support
program will be available at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/pws/grants/allotments state-terr.html.
This Guidance for FY 2016 and FY 2017 includes guidance for state recipients of DWSRF program
grants77. Grant recipients are expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives,
sub-objectives, strategic targets, and PAMs specified in this Guidance. In addition, grant recipients
should be focused on ensuring that the gains of the previous years' efforts are preserved and built upon.
The DWSRF Program is governed by 40 CFR Part 35 Subpart L, which implements SDWA Section 1452.
Additional guidance has been, and continues to be, issued as necessary to address program
implementation needs. The ARRA supplemental appropriation for the DWSRF contained a number of
new requirements unique to that appropriation. ARRA was implemented through guidance. Federal
appropriations bills for FY 2010-2012 contained specific requirements (similar to certain requirements of
ARRA) on the amounts appropriated in each of those years and those specific requirements have been
implemented through annual "Procedures", issued jointly by OGWDW and the Office of Wastewater
Management (OWM).
The SDWA Amendments of 1996 establish the DWSRF Program with the central purpose of providing
financial assistance to water systems and to state programs to help achieve the public health protection
objectives of the Act. SDWA requires that priority for funding be given to those projects that address the
most serious risk to human health; are necessary to ensure compliance with SDWA; and assist systems
most in need on a per household basis.
States, at their discretion, may reserve up to a total of 31% of any DWSRF capitalization grant for "set-
asides" to fund DWSRF program administration, small system technical assistance, state program
management, and local assistance. This includes:
• Support for the state PWSS program.
• State wide operator certification programs.
• State wide capacity development planning.
• System source water protection.
• System level capacity development actions.
To ensure the appropriate balance between financing capital projects to improve the delivery of safe
water and funding non-capital set-aside assistance for water systems, the PWSS program in each state
has the lead responsibility for determining the priority for providing these two forms of assistance to
water systems. This balance of funding priorities is to be reflected in the state's IUP. SDWA requires that
states submit an annual IUP that details how the state will use DWSRF program funds, including new
capitalization grants, as well as other grant funds, repayments, and other resources. A Project Priority
77 Read more on DWSRF grant programs at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 36 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
List is a required element of the IUP. The Project Priority List is a cornerstone of the IUP and presents all
the capital projects awaiting DWSRF assistance in priority funding order. States must also include a
"Fundable List" showing the specific projects that the state actually anticipates being ready to proceed
to receiving assistance in the year ahead. Additionally, states are required to submit set-aside work
plans that detail how set-aside funds will be used. Finally, states must submit, biennially, a report that
explains how DWSRF funds were actually used. States are also required to submit annual data on
program performance. Auditing is required to the extent laid out in the Single Audit Act.
EPA regions perform annual on-site reviews of state programs, including project file reviews and
transaction testing. For ARRA, an ARRA specific review was added as well as ARRA specific project file
reviews and transaction testing. These reviews serve as EPA's baseline monitoring for the DWSRF.
The DWSRF grant allotments are based on the Drinking Water Needs Survey. State-by-state allotments,
territorial funds, and the total amount available to each region for tribes will be available at
http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/index.cfm.
In FY 2016-2017, EPA and the states should take all appropriate and timely steps to ensure that all SRF
funds move as expeditiously as possible from EPA through states and into high priority projects,
consistent with sound program oversight, achieving the public health protection objectives of SDWA.
This includes continued emphasis on expediting/streamlining project outlay and billing to reduce ULOs.
The DIG Program is vital to the protection of USDW. EPA works with states and tribes to regulate and
monitor the injection of fluids, both hazardous and non-hazardous, into wells, to prevent contamination.
This Guidance for FY 2016-2017 includes guidance for state and tribal recipients of DIG grant program
funds. Each year, grant funds are distributed by the national DIG Program to help DIG programs enforce
the minimum federal DIG requirements. These funds are authorized by Congress under SDWA Section
1443. Grant recipients are expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives,
sub-objectives, strategic targets, and PAMs specified in this Guidance. In addition, grant resources
should be focused on ensuring that the gains of the previous years' efforts are preserved and built upon.
The overall objective of the DIG grant program is to protect public health by enforcing minimum
requirements to ensure that:
• All injection is authorized under either general rules or specific permits;
• Injection well owners and operators do not site, construct, operate, maintain, convert, plug,
abandon, or conduct any other injection activity that endangers USDW;
• Injected fluids stay within the well and the intended injection zone; and
• No injection occurs which allows for the introduction of any contaminant into an USDW if the
presence of that contaminant may cause a violation of any primary drinking water standard or
otherwise adversely affect public health.
Assisting owners and operators of UIC facilities in meeting these objectives require grantees to adopt a
variety of approaches and to coordinate efforts with other groundwater protection programs. FY 2013
priority activities for the UIC grant fund recipients should include the following:
• Timely submission of primacy program revisions for the purpose of adopting new or revised
federal regulations;
• Maintaining program capacity to implement UIC program requirements for all classes of wells;
• Ensuring that Class I, II and III (salt solution) wells that lose mechanical integrity are returned to
compliance;
Office of Water Page 37 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Addressing high priority Class V wells; and
• Populating the DIG National Database by sharing well specific data.
The grant allotments are determined by the DIG Grant Allocation Model and follow the criteria identified
in SDWA Section 1443 which requires DIG allocations to be based on such factors as "population,
geographic area, extent of underground injection practices, and other relevant factors."
Elevated blood mercury levels pose a significant health risk, especially to pregnant women, nursing
mothers, and young children. And the consumption of mercury-contaminated fish is the primary source
of mercury in blood. Across the country as of 2010, states and tribes have issued fish consumption
advisories for a range of contaminants covering 1.3 million river miles and almost 18 million lake acres.
In addition, a significant portion of the valuable shellfishing acres managed by states and tribes is not
open for use. EPA's national approach to meeting safe fish goals and improving the quality of fishing
waters is described in this section.
EPA's approach to making fish and shellfish safer to eat includes several key elements:
• Encourage development of statewide mercury reduction strategies;
• Reduce air deposition of mercury; and
• Improve the quality of fishing waters.
EPA will also improve public information and notification offish consumption recommendations and
risks in order to help people make more informed choices about selecting fish to eat.
Reduce Air Deposition of Mercury. Most fish advisories are for mercury78, and a critical element of the
strategy to reduce mercury in fish is reducing emissions of mercury from combustion sources in the U.S.
On a nationwide basis, by 2010, federal regulatory programs were expected to reduce electric-
generating unit emissions of mercury from their 2000 level (see EPA Strategic Plan; Goal 1: Taking Action
on Climate Change and Improving Air Quality).
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. EPA will continue to
support state efforts to identify specific waters with high mercury levels and then address these
problems using core CWA program authorities, including total maximum daily load (TMDL) and
permitting programs.
Improve the Quality of Fishing Waters. Success in achieving improved quality in shellfishing waters
relies on implementation of CWA 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, expanded monitoring and development of TMDLs may support
revision of discharge permit limits to ensure compliance with applicable CWA requirements.
Another key element of the strategy is to expand and improve information and notification of the risks
of fish consumption. As part of this work, EPA is also encouraging and supporting states and tribes to
78 Read more on fish consumption advisories at http://www.epa.gov/hg/advisories.htm.
Office of Water Page 38 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
adopt the fish tissue criterion for mercury that EPA issued in 2001 and apply it based on implementation
guidance.
In addition, a wide range of clean water programs that applies throughout the country will generally
reduce pathogen indicator levels in key waters. For example, improved implementation of NPDES permit
requirements for Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs), CAFOs, and storm water runoff, as well as
improved NPS control efforts, may contribute to restoration of shellfish uses.
Measure FS-SP6.N11 tracks the percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood
above the level of concern.
EPA is actively monitoring the development of fish consumption advisories and working with states to
improve monitoring to support this effort. Forty-two percent of lake acres and 36 percent of river miles
have been assessed as of 2010 to support waterbody-specific or regional consumption advisories or a
determination that no consumption advice is necessary (see measures FS-la and b). EPA also
encourages states and tribes to monitor fish tissue based on national guidance and most states are now
using EPA guidance recommendations in their fish advisory programs.
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 designated by states, authorized tribes, and territories for primary contact recreation use.
For FY 2014, EPA's national strategy for improving the safety of recreational waters will include four key
elements:
• Work to implement 2012 Recreational Water Quality Criteria for pathogen indicators;
• Identify unsafe recreational waters;
• Reduce pathogen indicator levels in all recreational waters; and
• Provide technical and program support to states for their beach monitoring and notification
activities.
Focusing on the Implementation of the 2012 Recommended Water Quality Criteria (RWQC). EPA
published final revised recreational water quality criteria in December 201279. The BEACH Act directs
states with BEACH Act waters to adopt new or revised RWQC into state WQS by December 2015. EPA
encourages states with non-BEACH Act waters to consider the 2012 RWQC in their next triennial review.
OW will provide guidance and tools to the states in the implementation of the criteria.
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 TMDLs.
In a related effort, OW will work in partnership with OECA to better focus compliance and enforcement
resources to unsafe recreational waters. In addition, wet weather discharges, which are a major source
of pathogens, are one of OECA's national priorities.
79 For more info, please see http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/health/recreation/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 39 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Reduce Pathogen Indicator Densities in Recreational Waters Generally. In addition to focusing on
waters that are unsafe for swimming today, EPA will continue working with states, local governments,
and tribes in FY 2014 to reduce the overall level of pathogens and other harmful pollutants discharged
to recreational waters using three key approaches:
• Reduce pollution from CSOs that are not in compliance with the CWA and 1994 CSO Control Policy;
• Address other sources discharging sewage-contaminated water under the NPDES permit program;
and
• Encourage improved management of septic systems.
Overflows from Combined Sewer Systems (CSSs) and Sanitary Sewer Systems (SSSs) most often contain
high levels of suspended solids, pathogenic microorganisms, toxic pollutions, floatables, nutrients,
oxygen-demanding organic compounds, oil and grease, and other pollutants and can cause exceedances
of WQS. Such exceedances may pose risks to human health, threaten aquatic life and its habitat, and
impair the use and enjoyment of the Nation's waterways. EPA is working with states and local
governments to fully implement the CSO Policy providing for the development and implementation of
long-term CSO control plans. EPA expects that 789 (92%) out of the 862 CSO communities will have
enforceable schedules in place to implement approved long-term CSO control plans, including sewer
separation, in FY 2014 (see measure SS-1). EPA will also work with states to resolve longstanding issues
associated with sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and bypasses at treatment plants.
Other key sources of fecal contamination to the Nation's waters are discharges from CAFOs, municipal
storm sewer systems, and industrial facilities. EPA expects to work with states to assure that these
facilities are covered by permits where necessary. In addition, EPA expects to work with the states to
develop approaches for monitoring wet weather discharges and impacts to surface waters, developing
water quality-based effluent limits, and identifying effective control measures and BMPs. For CAFOs,
NPDES regulations currently require facilities with discharges to seek permit coverage. Full
implementation of the NPDES permitting requirement for CAFOs may result in reduced discharges of
contamination due to permitting requirements that place controls on discharges of manure and process
wastewater.
Finally, there is growing evidence that ineffective septic systems are adversely impacting water
resources. EPA will work with state, tribal, and local governments to develop voluntary approaches to
improving management of these systems.
Provide Technical Support for 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. OW issued updated National Beach Guidance and
Required Performance Criteria (Beach Guidance) in 2014. The Beach Guidance requires BEACH Act states
to submit schedules for adopting WQS consistent with the 2012 RWQC and for identifying and using an
appropriate beach notification threshold. The guidance also discusses methods that can provide faster
monitoring results (qPCR and modeling) and incorporates new media and other innovative approaches
to communicating advisories to the public.
EPA will continue to work with states, tribes, and others to implement programs to protect and restore
water resources with four key goals in mind:
Office of Water Page 40 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Core Water Programs: EPA, states, and tribes need to continue maintaining and improving the
integration and implementation of the core national clean water programs throughout the
country to most effectively protect and restore water quality.
Use of the Watershed Approach: EPA will continue to support the 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 continue to work with states and tribes to
strengthen capacities to identify and address impaired waters, including the development of
integrated protection and restoration strategies, and to use adaptive management approaches
to implement cost-effective restoration solutions, giving priority to watershed approaches
where appropriate.
Water Protection Goals and Strategies: EPA will work with states and tribes to strengthen
capacities to identify and protect high quality waters and watersheds, and to integrate
protection and restoration as part of a comprehensive approach to achieve environmental
results.
EPA will continue to work with states, and tribes to effectively implement and better integrate programs
established under CWA to protect, improve, and restore water quality. To achieve this, EPA will apply
adaptive management principles to our core programs and initiatives. Key tasks for FY 2016-2017
include:
• Strengthen the WQS program;
• Improve water quality monitoring and assessment;
• Implement TMDLs and other watershed plans;
• Strengthen the NPDES permit program;
• Implement practices to reduce pollution from all NPSs;
• Implement the CWSRF; and
• Support drinking water protection, through a variety of means, including the CWA-SDWA
Collaboration Initiative.
As part of this process, EPA will continue efforts to integrate across programs, media and federal
agencies to more effectively support efforts to protect and restore waters, including drinking water
sources, as envisioned in the CWA-SDWA Collaboration Initiative (Section II.C. Protecting Water
Supplies). In the event that OW finds that existing programs, initiatives, or processes are not resulting in
a significant contribution to national goals, we will work with regions, states, tribes, and other partners
to rethink and redesign the delivery of clean water programs to more effectively protect and restore
waterbodies and watersheds. Similarly, EPA regional offices have the flexibility to emphasize various
parts of core national programs and modify targets to meet EPA regional and state needs and
conditions. In addition, EPA will continue to work with states and tribes to implement the Water Quality
Framework, which is a new way of integrating EPA's data and information systems to more fully support
water quality managers' information needs. The Framework will streamline water quality assessment
and reporting while providing a more complete picture of the nation's water quality. Integrating the
data systems through the Framework provides the following benefits:
• Reduce state burden by streamlining the Clean Water Act assessment and reporting process;
• Provide the means to tell the 'whole' story from monitoring to assessment to restoration;
• Provide better measurement and reporting of water quality improvement;
• Provide more transparency in water quality decision making;
Office of Water Page 41 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• Allow for tools to identify relevant monitoring data for water quality assessments;
• Support state development of tools to automate the screening of monitoring data against water
quality standards; and
• Connect data, decisions, and actions geo-spatially.
This National Water Program Guidance for FY 2016 and FY 2017 includes guidance for state and
interstate recipients of Section 106 grants for Water Pollution Control Programs. As a general matter,
grant recipients are expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives,
subobjectives, strategic targets, and measures specified in Section III.C.I of this Guidance. In addition,
this section includes specific guidance for state, interstate, and tribal grant recipients in these Section
106 Grant Guidance areas. Together, section III.C.I, the grant guidance sections, and Appendix D replace
the biannual Section 106 Grant Guidance.
The Section 106 Program is providing associated program support, to states and tribes participating in
the National Aquatics Resource Survey (NARS) by directly funding work related to the survey. EPA
developed guidance for the use of associated program support costs authority by the Section 106
Program. In addition, the use of associated program support costs authority to fund the national survey
will be discussed in detail in the next national survey guidance. Please see the Section 106 grant
guidance on monitoring and Appendix D for more information.
This grant guidance covers only the core water pollution control activities listed above. EPA continues to
provide separate guidance for the following water pollution control activities:
• Tribal water pollution control programs.80
• State and Interstate use of Monitoring Initiative funds.81
• Water pollution enforcement activities.82
WQS83 are the regulatory and scientific foundation of water quality protection programs (WQPP) under
the CWA. Under the Act, states and authorized tribes establish WQS that define the goals and limits for
waters within their jurisdictions. These standards are then 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
WQS and promulgate replacement standards where needed; develop water quality criteria, information,
methods, models, and policies to ensure that each waterbody in the U.S. has a clear, comprehensive
suite of standards consistent with CWA, and as needed, provide technical and scientific support to
states, territories, and authorized tribes in the development of their standards.
EPA continues to place a high priority on state and territories adoption of numeric water quality criteria
for nitrogen and phosphorus pollution to help address water quality issues of eutrophication and human
80 Please see http://epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/106tgg07.htm. Tribes with EPA-approved WQS should also see the
Section 106 guidance on WQS for states, interstate agencies, and authorized tribes below.
81 Please see http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/cwf/106-guidelines-monitor.cfm.
82 Please see http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/index.htm.
83 Please see http ://water. epa. gov/scitech/swguidance/.
Office of Water Page 42 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
health (see measure WQ-Ola). Please also see discussion on Controlling Nutrient Pollution in Section
II.D.
Continuing degradation of previously high quality waters is of increasing concern. EPA's antidegradation
policy calls for states and authorized tribes to conduct a public review of proposed activities that are
likely to lower water quality in high quality waters to determine whether the proposed degradation is
necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters
are located. EPA strongly encourages states and authorized tribes without antidegradation
implementation procedures to establish them as soon as possible to ensure that antidegradation
policies are implemented.
EPA continues to encourage and support tribes in implementing one of the three approaches for
protecting water quality contained in EPA's Final Guidance on Awards of Grants to Indian Tribes under
Section 106 of the Clean Water Ac^4. The three approaches are: the non-regulatory approach; the tribal
law water quality protection approach; and the EPA-approved water quality protection approach. EPA
tracks the progress of tribes adopting EPA-approved WQS under the third approach (see measure WQ-
02).
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 WQS up to date with the latest scientific
information (see measures WQ-03a and 03b) and to facilitate adoption of standards that EPA can
approve (see measure WQ-04a).
It is EPA's objective for states and authorized tribes85 to administer the water quality program consistent
with the requirements of the CWA and the WQS regulation. EPA expects states and tribes will enhance
the quality and timeliness of their WQS triennial reviews so that these standards reflect EPA guidance
and updated scientific information. EPA encourages states and tribes to reach early agreement with EPA
on triennial review priorities and schedules and coordinate at critical points to facilitate timely EPA
reviews of state WQS submissions. It is particularly important for states and tribes to keep their water
quality criteria up to date, including considering all the scientific information EPA has issued for specific
pollutants since the state or tribe last updated those criteria, and adding or revising criteria as necessary
(see measures WQ-03a and 03b). States with disapproved standards provisions should work with EPA to
resolve the disapprovals promptly. States having waters with federally promulgated standards should
consider adopting their own EPA-approved standards to enable EPA to remove the federal standards.
EPA's March 2011 memorandum concerning a framework for nutrient reductions reaffirmed EPA's
commitment to partnering with states and collaborating with stakeholders to make greater progress in
accelerating the reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus loadings to our Nation's waters. EPA continues to
encourage states to set priorities on a watershed or statewide basis, establish nutrient reduction
targets, reduce point and nonpoint source nutrient loads, inform the public, provide accountability, and
adopt numeric nutrient criteria (NNC).
Originated in FY 2013, WQ-26 focused on identifying strong state and territorial progress toward
achieving elements #1 (priority setting), #2 (reduction targets), and #8 (NNC). It was noted in the 2013
measure definition that EPA might modify the measure in future years to address other framework
84 Read the Final Section 106 Tribal Grant Guidance at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/cwf/106tggQ7.cfm.
85 Tribes that EPA has found eligible under CWA section 518(e) to be treated in a similar manner as a state (TAS) to
administer WQS programs.
Office of Water Page 43 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
elements. Beginning in 2016, EPA is eliminating WQ-26 and instead considering a new measure in the
future regarding control of point sources of nutrient pollution which is related to the third element
(ensuring effectiveness of point source permits) of the framework. As EPA continues to place a high
priority on states adopting numeric WQS for total nitrogen and total phosphorus that apply to all
waters, the component of WQ-26 that tracked NNC progress will now be tracked as one element of
water quality criteria measure WQ-Ola.
EPA strongly encourages states and authorized tribes without antidegradation implementation methods
to establish them as soon as possible, consistent with EPA's regulation.
States and tribes should make their WQS 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 in
the state or reservation, for example by providing tables and maps of designated uses and related
criteria.
EPA's goal is to achieve greater integration of federal, regional, state, tribal, and local level monitoring
efforts to connect monitoring and assessment activities across geographic scales, in a cost-efficient and
effective manner, so that scientifically defensible monitoring data is available to address issues and
problems at each of these scales. EPA will continue to work with states, tribes, territories, and other
partners to provide the monitoring86 data and information needed to make good water quality
protection and restoration decisions and to track changes in the Nation's water quality over time. In
addition, EPA will work with states and other partners to address research and technical gaps related to
sampling methods, analytical approaches, and data management.
State and EPA cooperation on statistically-valid assessments of water condition nationwide remains a
top priority. The report for the rivers-and-streams survey conducted in FY 2013/2014 will be distributed
in FY 2016 and completed in FY 2017. As part of the national surveys, EPA, states, and tribes will
collaborate to conduct the FY 2015 field sampling for the National Coastal Condition Assessment.
Following the FY 2015 release of the National Wetland Condition report, EPA, states, and tribes will
collaborate to plan and implement the 2016 NWCA. Similarly, the National Lakes Assessment will release
NLA 2012 in FY 2015 and begin planning NLA 2017 in FY 2016.
EPA also stresses the importance of using statistical surveys to generate statewide assessments and
track broad-scale trends; enhancing and implementing designs to address water information needs at
local scales (e.g., watersheds) including monitoring waters where restoration actions have been
implemented, and integrating both statistical surveys and targeted monitoring to assess the condition of
all water resources overtime. EPA developed a Statewide Statistical Survey Web Data Entry Tool to
facilitate reporting of these results with the state Integrated Report (IR). Based on this reporting, EPA
has added an indicator measure to explore use of state scale survey results to report on protection and
maintenance of water quality. The proposed Statewide Statistical Survey Indicator Measure is:
Number of states protecting or improving water quality conditions, as demonstrated by state-scale
statistical surveys
• On average, water quality is improving or at least not degrading (there is no statistically
significant decrease in mean water quality);
• The percentage of waters in good condition is increasing or remaining constant; and
• The percentage of waters in poor condition is decreasing or remaining constant.
86 Read more on monitoring data at http://water.epa. gov/tvpe/watersheds/monitoring/monintr.cfm.
Office of Water Page 44 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
EPA will assist tribes in developing monitoring strategies appropriate to their water quality programs
through training and technical assistance and work with tribes to provide data in a format accessible for
storage in EPA data systems (see measure WQ-06a). As tribal strategies are developed, EPA will work
with tribes to implement them over time.
EPA is also working with tribes to track improvements where water quality is meeting benchmark
criteria and showing no degradation on tribal lands (see measures WQ-SP14a.Nll and WQ-SP14b.Nll).
There is increased emphasis on protection of high-quality watersheds and how they support all other
Clean Water Act efforts and help mitigate the effects of Climate Change by moderating flow and keeping
habitat corridors intact. EPA has established an MOD with the Association of Clean Water
Administrators (ACWA) and The Nature Conservancy to help highlight protection of healthy watersheds
and showcase pilot efforts to integrate these protection efforts into Clean Water Act programs, and will
launch a national Healthy Watersheds Consortium Grant to sponsor projects nationwide.
to
CWA Section 106(e)(l) and 40 CFR Part 35.168(a) provide that EPA award Section 106 funds to a state
only if the state has provided for or is carrying out as part of its program, the establishment and
operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to monitor and to
compile and analyze data on the quality of navigable waters in the state, and provision for annually
updating the data and including it in the Section 305(b) report. EPA issued the 2003 guidance, "Elements
of a State Water Monitoring and Assessment Program"87 (Elements Guidance) as a recommended set of
basic components of a state water monitoring program to aid in improving monitoring and assessment
programs.
EPA encourages states, territories, and interstate commissions to use a combination of Section 106
monitoring funds, base 106 funds, and other resources available to enhance their monitoring activities,
and meet the objectives of the Elements Guidance88. These efforts include:
• Implementing monitoring strategies;
• Undertaking statistical surveys;
• Improving management of water quality data, including annual transmission to EPA via WQX; and
• Submitting integrated assessment reports under CWA Section 305(b) including results of state-scale
statistical surveys, and listing of impaired waters under CWA Section 303(d) by April 1, 2016.
EPA will continue to include a term and condition in Section 106 grants that states will transmit their
water quality data to the national STORET Warehouse using the WQX framework to satisfy the general
obligation to report water quality data annually.89 EPA will support states' use of WQX and WQX Web to
submit data to the STORET Data Warehouse through technical assistance and Exchange Network grants.
This support and assistance will also be provided for states to share Integrated Reporting results under
CWA Sections 303(d) and 305(b), and the tools to support this reporting are currently being modernized
in collaboration with states. EPA will support state transition to and implementation of the new ATTAINS
data flow. Water quality assessment data are critical to measuring progress towards the Agency's and
states' goals of restoring and improving water quality. EPA has requested an increase in Section 106
funds to support states' management and use of water quality data by improving automation of
87 Read more on the Elements Guidance at http://www.epa. gov/owow/monitoring/elements/elements03 14 03 .pdf.
88Read more on the Elements Guidance at http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/elements/elements03 14 03.pdf.
89Read more on STORET and WQX at http ://www. epa. gov/storet/wqx/.
Office of Water Page 45 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
screening, analysis, visualization, and reporting of water quality data to support priority setting,
resource allocation for protection and restoration activities, and public accountability.
EPA continues to offer associated program support authority to fund field and laboratory services for
states and tribes. Generally, the associated program support costs authority is used to fund activities
that promote the common goals of the requesting state(s) and/or promote administrative efficiency and
cost savings to the recipients. EPA can provide associated program support through a grant, contract, or
Interagency Agreement (IA). In the case of Monitoring Initiative funds, EPA is offering the associated
program support vehicle as another option to assist in implementing national surveys. EPA anticipates
that use of this vehicle in support of the national surveys will decrease administrative burdens and
provide other cost savings for participating states and tribes.
EPA will work with states and tribes to determine the level of funds that each recipient wants to allocate
for national contracts through the associated program support costs authority. The services funded
through this vehicle will include laboratory analysis and field sampling for the National Wetlands
Condition Assessment and the National Lakes Assessment. States and tribes may work with their EPA
regional office to opt out of this associated program support vehicle. Regions will obtain written
confirmation from each Section 106 agency receiving a share of the National Survey funds of their
approval of the specific amount identified as associated program support. For states and tribes that opt-
out of this associated program support vehicle, in-kind services will still be available. Although EPA is
expanding the options for obtaining support for implementing field and lab work, EPA encourages states
and tribes with the capacity to conduct independent field and/or lab work to do so themselves.
Additional information can be found in Appendix D and will be included in the Monitoring Initiative
Guidance.
The CWA 303(d) program is continuing to work with states to implement the 303(d) Program Vision90 to
more effectively achieve the water quality goals of each state by setting long-term priorities. These long-
term priorities will serve as the foundation to guide how the state will implement its responsibilities
under the CWA 303(d) program. Timely submittal of required CWA Section 303(d) lists is necessary to
effectively coordinate with other CWA programs to target the development and implementation of
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for CWA Section 303(d) listed impaired waterbodies. TMDLs are a
critical tool for meeting water quality restoration goals,91 and will continue to be the primary feature of
the program. 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/programs92. Through partnerships with the states, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),
USFS93, and others, EPA has established networks that are uniquely positioned to improve water quality
through development and implementation of TMDLs and alternative restoration and protection
approaches. For impaired waters where alternatives to TMDLs (e.g., watershed plans) are better suited
to achieve water qualtiy goals, these networks are positioned to develop and implement alternative
90Read more on the 303(d) Program Vision at
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/programvision.cfm
91 Read more on the 303(d) and TMDL Program at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm.
92 Read more on TMDLs at: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm
93 Read more on partnership with U.S. Forest Service at:
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/usfsepamoa_index.cfm
Office of Water Page 46 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
approaches. These networks are also working to identify and protect healthy waters/watersheds.
Integrating core program tools, using the watershed approach, helps focus efforts to restore and protect
the nation's waters. In areas where drinking water supplies have been identified as impaired, states
should work across their CWA programs to determine the most appropriate strategy to restore and
maintain water quality standards attainment in these critical water resources.
EPA is implementing a new approach to track water quality progress using the National Hydrography
Dataset Plus (NHDP/t/s) to calculate priority watershed areas using the NHDP/t/s 'catchments' to describe
where states have developed TMDLs, alternative restoration and protection approaches. This approach
provides a consistent method for measuring progress at the local scale, while allowing for tighter
integration with data and assessments at the state and national scale. The program will continue to
report on the new performance measures (i.e., WQ-27 and WQ-28) using this approach.
Lastly, EPA is developing a planned rulemaking to provide opportunities for tribes to more fully engage
in the CWA Impaired Water Listing and TMDL Program. CWA section 518 provides that eligible tribes
may seek TAS for CWA section 303; however existing regulations do not explicitly address how tribes
obtain Treatment in the Same Manner as a State (TAS) for the 303(d) Program. Regulations are already
in place expressly establishing a TAS process for each of the other relevant CWA programs available to
tribes (e.g., WQS, NPDES, section 404 permitting for the discharge of dredged or fill material). In this
rulemaking, EPA would propose a process for tribes to apply to EPA for TAS authority to establish lists of
impaired waters and TMDLs pursuant to section 303(d) of the CWA.
In 2014, EPA engaged in pre-proposal consultation and coordination with tribes and states to gather
input. EPA is now reviewing and analyzing all of the input received, and developing a draft of the
planned proposed rule. The proposal could be published in the Federal Register in early 2015, with 60
days for public comment, and opportunities for further consultation and coordination with states and
tribes.
As previously mentioned, EPA encourages states to effectively assess their waters and make all
necessary efforts to ensure the timely submittal of required CWA Section 303(d) lists of impaired waters,
which contain information made available in the Assessment, TMDL Tracking, and Implementation
System (ATTAINS). Continued coordination across multiple programs within and outside the state is
encouraged as more difficult TMDLs are being developed (e.g., broad-scale mercury and nutrient). EPA
will continue to work with states, interstate agencies, and tribes to foster a watershed approach as the
guiding principle of clean water programs. While TMDLs will continue to be the primary tool, EPA
recognizes that in certain situations, alternative restoration approaches may be more appropriate to
meet water quality restoration goals. See information above and measure WQ-27 and WQ-28 for
information on EPA's expectations. Geospatial data continues to be a critical component of the state's
reporting. Through approaches identified as part of the Water Quality Framework, EPA will continue to
work with the states to develop and provide accurate geospatial data that can support the tracking of
progress as well as be made available to the public.
Office of Water Page 47 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
iv.
The NPDES Program94 requires point source dischargers to be permitted and requires pretreatment
programs to control certain discharges to the Nation's publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). EPA is
working with states to structure the permit program to better support comprehensive protection of
water quality on a watershed basis and efficiently manage recent increases in the scope of the program
arising from court orders and emerging environmental issues. In addition, the NPDES Program has been
working closely with OECA to implement the CWA Action Plan95. Some key NPDES program efforts
include:
NPDES Program Strategic Planning: The NPDES program is undergoing a strategic planning effort aimed
at meeting 21st century water quality challenges with appropriately focused permitting and oversight
processes, modernized data management, and effective use of skilled talent. EPA will work with states
to further outline these goals and how they will be met. EPA aims to strengthen partnerships and clarify
roles between headquarters, EPA regions, and states, as well as between the WQS, TMDL, and NPDES
programs. Additionally, as part of this effort, performance measures will likely be revised, as discussed in
the High Priority Permits section below. EPA's Office of Wastewater Management (OWM) will also
continue working with OECA to streamline oversight, compliance monitoring, and enforcement in the
NPDES program and to create efficiencies and improve transparency by converting paper reporting to
electronic.
Permit Quality Reviews (PQR), and Action Items96: As discussed in Section II.B, Improving the Integrity
of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality, OW manages the PQR process to assess the
health and integrity of the NPDES program in authorized states, tribes, territories, and EPA regions. EPA
maintains a commitment and tracking system to ensure that NPDES Action Items identified in these
assessments are implemented. Implementation is measured through measure WQ-11. Additional NPDES
Action Items will continue to be identified and addressed through this process in FY 2016 and FY 2017.
After piloting PQR-SRF integrated reviews in FY 2012 and FY 2013, EPA determined efficiency and
benefits of integrated reviews vary across EPA regions and states. Therefore, since FY 2014, EPA regions
are conducting PQR and SRF reviews either separately or integrated, at their discretion.
High Priority Permits and Permit Backlog: The NPDES permitted universe has grown and diversified
over the last 25 years without comparable increases in resources. While permitting efficiencies (such as
general permits and use of permit templates) can help the permitting authority keep up with much of
their NPDES permitted universe, some backlog in permit issuance is inevitable. States and EPA regions
must be able to prioritize permits. It is important that permitting authorities issue permits with the most
environmental significance for public health and water quality protection on a timely basis.
OWM has worked with states and EPA regions over the last several years through measures WQ-19a
and b to select high priority permits based on programmatic and environmental significance and commit
to issuing a specific number of those permits during the fiscal year. There are also long-standing
measures focused on the permit backlog (WQ-12a and b). In recent discussions with EPA regions and
states, it has been suggested that the priority permits and backlog measures could be revised to better
reflect program health and integrity and allow the permitting authority to focus on those permits that
are truly the most environmentally significant.
Historically, much emphasis has been placed on reducing the overall permit backlog, with the percent of
non-tribal facilities covered by current (i.e., not backlogged) permits being one of OW's Key
94Read more on the NPDES Program at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/.
95Read more on the CWA Action Plan at http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/clean-water-act-cwa-action-plan.
96Read more onPQRs at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/basics/NPDES-Permit-Quality-Review.cfm.
Office of Water Page 48 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Performance Indicators (KPI). This potentially competes with efforts to address the most
environmentally significant permits and can skew an evaluation of overall program health because,
often, the most environmentally significant permits are the most time-consuming to issue due to
complex environmental issues and the involvement of many stakeholders.
In FY 2016, OWM will continue to work with EPA regions and states to set targets for the existing priority
permits and backlog measures, but will also work with EPA regions and states to determine a new
approach for these measures for FY 2017. OWM believes that certain prioritization criteria should be
uniform nationwide but that EPA regions and states should also have flexibility in identifying their high
priority permits. OWM is also considering making a priority permits measure a KPI in place of the
backlog measure or reducing the 90% current goal for the backlog measure to allow more focus on
those most environmentally significant permits that may take more time to issue.
Watershed Permits/Water Quality Trading: Organizing permits on a watershed basis can improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of the program. Permits can also be used as an effective mechanism to
facilitate cost-effective pollution reduction through water quality trading. EPA will continue to
coordinate with EPA regional offices, states, USDA, and other federal agencies to implement watershed
programs.
Green Infrastructure97: As discussed in Section II.C, Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and
Infrastructure, EPA released a new Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda98 in October 2013. The new
version expands capacity building efforts and includes a new emphasis on aligning federal support for
green infrastructure. EPA also launched a Green Infrastructure Collaborative with external stakeholders
and other federal agencies to leverage public and private resources to advance broader use of green
infrastructure. In FY 2016 and FY 2017, EPA will continue to provide technical assistance to community
partners, deliver webinars, and prepare decision tools to encourage the use of green infrastructure in
permitting and enforcement activities. EPA supports use of CWA Section 106 funds to provide
programmatic support for green infrastructure efforts, which promote prevention, reduction, and
elimination of water pollution.
Pesticides": On January 7, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit determined that NPDES
permits are required for discharges from the application of pesticides to waters of the U.S. In response
to the Court's decision, EPA issued a final NPDES pesticides general permit (PGP) on October 31, 2011
for areas of the country where EPA is the NPDES permitting authority. EPA has been and will continue to
assist NPDES-authorized states to oversee implementation of those permits, and assist in a national
effort to educate the pesticides application industry regarding the new permit requirements.
Vessels: In December 2013, EPA issued the second Vessel General Permit (VGP) which provides
coverage for commercial vessels in U.S. waters.100
Among other things, the 2013 Final VGP contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels
which will reduce the threat posed by the transport of invasive species to U.S. waters. Ballast water
discharges have resulted in the introduction of numerous aquatic invasive species, resulting in severe
degradation of many ecosystems and billions of dollars of economic damages. Also, this permit contains
more stringent effluent limits for oil-to-sea interfaces and exhaust gas scrubber washwater, which will
help prevent adverse environmental impacts of chronic discharge of oils and grease into U.S. waters.
97Read more on green infrastructure at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/index.cfm.
98 See http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/2013 GI FINAL Agenda 101713 .pdf.
99 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/pesticides/.
100 More information is at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/vessels/vgpermit.cfm.
Office of Water Page 49 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Stormwater101: In October 2008, the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council (NRC)
made several recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the EPA's stormwater program and the
quality of urban streams. EPA has evaluated the NRC findings and is implementing a strategy to provide
incentives, technical assistance, and tools to communities to encourage them to implement strong
stormwater programs; leverage existing requirements to strengthen municipal stormwater permits; and
continue to promote green infrastructure as an integral part of stormwater management.
CAFOs: In July 2012, EPA amended the CAFO regulations to remove the requirement that CAFOs that
"propose to discharge" must seek NPDES permit coverage. EPA made these revisions in response to the
court decision in National Pork Producers Council v. EPA. EPA is working to assure that all states have up-
to-date CAFO NPDES programs and that all CAFOs that discharge seek and obtain NPDES permit
coverage. In addition, EPA will continue to track the number of CAFOs covered by NPDES permits (see
measure WQ-13).
Chesapeake Bay: On December 29, 2010, EPA established the Chesapeake BayTMDL102, a historic and
comprehensive "pollution diet" with appropriate accountability measures to initiate sweeping actions to
restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay and the region's streams, creeks, and rivers. The TMDL is
designed to ensure that all nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment pollution control efforts needed to fully
restore the Bay and its tidal rivers are in place by 2025, with controls, practices and actions in place by
2017 that would achieve 60% of the necessary reductions. As the TMDL has moved into the
implementation phase, NPDES permits for discharges contributing to nitrogen, phosphorus, and
sediment pollution are being written to incorporate the TMDL where applicable. These efforts will
continue in FY 2016 and FY 2017.
Sanitary Sewer Overflows and Bypasses: EPA will continue to work with states to resolve longstanding
issues related to overflows in separate sanitary sewer systems and bypasses at the treatment plant. On
June 19-20, 2014, EPA held a forum of public health experts to discuss the public health implications of
discharges into waterways of 'blended' effluent from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) served
by sanitary sewer collection systems.
Integrated Wastewater and Stormwater Planning: Also discussed in Section II.C. Providing Safe and
Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure. In recent years, EPA has begun to embrace integrated
planning approaches to municipal wastewater and stormwater management. OW and OECAfurther
committed to work with states and communities to implement and use integrated planning in their
October 27, 2011, memorandum "Achieving Water Quality Through Municipal Stormwater and
Wastewater Plans." On June 5, 2012, the Integrated Planning Approach framework^03 was released. EPA
will work with states to determine the appropriate roles of permit and enforcement authorities in
addressing the regulatory requirements identified in municipal integrated plans. On January 13, 2013,
EPA issued a memorandum "Assessing Financial Capability for Municipal Clean Water Act
Requirements"104 that identifies issues the Agency is working closely with local governments to
clarify. On November 24, 2014, EPA released the Financial Capability Assessment Framework105 that
discusses key elements of EPA's approach in working with permittees and provides examples of
additional information that may help communities provide a more complete and accurate picture of
101 For more information, please see http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm7program id=6.
102 Read more on the Chesapeake Bay TMDL at http://www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl/.
103 Read the October 27, 2011 and June 5, 2012 memorandums at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/integratedplans.cfm.
104Read it at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw regionalmemo.pdf.
105 Read the November 24, 2014, framework at
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/upload/integratedjlanning_framework.pdf.
Office of Water Page 50 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
their financial capability. In 2014, EPA announced its provision of $335,000 in technical assistance to
five communities to develop components of integrated plans to support CWA permit conditions.
Pretreatment106: EPA and states will monitor the number and national percentage of significant
industrial users that have control mechanisms in place to implement applicable pretreatment
requirements prior to discharging to POTWs. EPA will also monitor the number and national percentage
of categorical industrial users in non-approved pretreatment POTWs that have control mechanisms in
place to implement applicable pretreatment requirements (see measures WQ-14a & b).
Compliance and Enforcement: As part of the CWA Action Plan107, OECA is leading an effort to develop
and implement an improved framework to identify and prioritize the most serious NPDES violations for
follow up action. OECA will then align it with appropriate enforcement response recommendations and
program performance expectations. In addition, this effort is expected to identify necessary tools to
support the improved framework. This work will continue in FY 2016 and FY 2017.
States should continue to implement significant actions identified during regional reviews and PQRs to
assure effective management of the permit program and to adopt efficiencies to improve environmental
results. Where EPA regions review of state-EPA MOAs determines that MOAs might require revision,
updating, or supplementation, states should work cooperatively with EPA regions to identify and
complete appropriate actions. States should also implement recommended significant actions identified
under the EPA/Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) enforcement and compliance "State Review
Framework" process. EPA will track the implementation of the significant action items described above
(see measure WQ-11). EPA will work with each state to evaluate and set programmatic and performance
goals to maximize water quality improvement and achieve state and EPA regional priorities across CWA
programs to maintain the integrity of the NPDES programs. EPA and states should work together to
optimally balance competing priorities, schedules for action items based on the significance of the
action, and program revisions. States should place emphasis on implementing criteria to ensure that
priority permits selected are those offering the greatest benefit to improve water quality. States are
encouraged to seek opportunities to incorporate efficiency tools, such as trading and linking
development of WQS, TMDLs, and permits. States are expected to ensure that stormwater permits are
reissued on a timely basis and to strengthen the provisions of municipal separate storm sewer system
(MS4) permits as they are reissued to include clear and enforceable requirements. States should
consider incorporating green infrastructure in all stormwater permits. States need to update their
programs to implement the CAFO rule, including regulations, permits and technical standards, and work
closely with their inspection and enforcement programs to ensure full implementation of the NPDES
CAFO regulations. In general, states should ensure that permittees submit data that accurately
characterizes the pollutant loadings in their discharge for reasonable potential determinations and other
reporting.
Whether through direct input or batch upload, states are expected to ensure data availability by fully
populating the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS)-NPDES with the data elements that are
comparable to Water Enforcement National Data Base (WENDB) (December 28, 2007 memo from
Michael Stahl and James Hanlon, "ICIS Addendum to the Appendix of the 1985 Permit Compliance
System Policy Statement") for the appropriate regulated universes of facilities. After the effective date
of the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule (expected by the end of calendar year 2015), all states and
106 Read more on the Pretreatment Program at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm7program id=3.
107Read more on the CWA Action Plan at http ://www2 .epa. gov/enforcement/clean-water-act-cwa-action-plan.
Office of Water Page 51 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
applicable NPDES-regulated facilities are required to fully comply with that regulation, including the
reporting to EPA of required NPDES information as identified in existing regulation, that regulation, or its
appendices, and by the deadlines identified in that regulation. The required data will include 1)
information from NPDES-authorized states regarding their program implementation activities, such as
permit issuance, inspections, violation determinations, and enforcement actions, and 2) information
from NPDES-regulated facilities, if applicable, for NPDES reporting requirements including those
associated with Discharge Monitoring Reports, Notices of Intent for coverage under general permits,
and various program reports. OECA has a separate NPM Guidance, which identifies activities for
improving enforcement efforts aimed at addressing water quality impairment through the CWA Action
Plan108. OW and states will be working closely with OECA as the CWA Action Plan is implemented.
v. to all
As highlighted briefly in the Controlling Nutrient Pollution, Section II.D, NPS pollution109 from sources,
such as agricultural lands, forestry sites, and urban areas, is the largest single remaining cause of water
pollution. EPA provides grant funds to states and tribes under CWA Section 319 to implement
comprehensive programs to control nonpoint pollution, including reduction of nitrogen, phosphorus,
and sediment loadings. EPA will continue to monitor progress in reducing loadings of these key
pollutants in the EPA's Section 319 Grants Reporting and Tracking System under measure WQ-09. In
addition, EPA estimates that more than half of the waters identified on states' Section 303(d) impaired
waters list are primarily impaired by NPS pollutants and EPA will continue to track progress in restoring
these waters nationwide through measure WQ-10. In FY 2016-2017, EPA will continue to oversee
implementation of the CWA Section 319 program reforms issued in 2013. EPA will also continue growing
the collaboration with USDA via the National Water Quality Initiative (NWOJ), continuing to leverage our
respective programs and to support states' monitoring water quality results from the partnership in
selected NWOJ watersheds.
In addition to overseeing implementation of the 319 program and grant guidelines, EPA continues to
encourage states to use the CWA Section 319 program to support a more comprehensive, watershed
approach to protecting and restoring priority waterbody types for the state, including all types of
surface water (and ground water if applicable) as identified in the state's NPS management program.
EPA continues to support states, territories, and tribes in developing comprehensive watershed-based
plans geared towards restoring impaired waters on a watershed basis while still protecting high quality
and threatened waters as necessary. In FY 2016-2017, EPA will continue to 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. States also
have the flexibility through their CWSRF programs to provide funding that supports efforts to control
pollution from NPSs.
During FY 2016-2017, states, territories, and tribes will continue to implement their NPS management
programs and should update their NPS management programs if necessary. States and territories will
adhere to the revised "Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories"
(http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfin). Tribes will continue to follow the separate tribal Section
319 guidelines available at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/tribal/index.cfm.
108Read more on the CWA Action Plan at http ://www2 .epa. gov/enforcement/clean-water-act-cwa-action-plan.
109 Read more on nonpoint source pollution at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 52 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
vi. the
In 2016-2017, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program will promote the implementation
of the CWSRF Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA - 2014) amendments. A
particular focus will be implementing the cost and effectiveness planning provision under WRRDA,
which takes effect on October 1, 2015. This provision requires certain CWSRF assistance recipients to
certify that they have studied and evaluated the cost and effectiveness of the processes, materials,
techniques, and technologies for carrying out the proposed project or activity and selected, to the
maximum extent practicable, a project or activity that maximizes the potential for efficient water use,
reuse, recapture, and conservation, and energy conservation. The CWSRF program will provide technical
assistance, conduct oversight, and evaluate progress made under the cost and effectiveness planning
provision.
The CWSRF will continue to work with states and communities in 2016-2017 to implement the
Sustainable Water Infrastructure Policy to promote system-wide planning. This includes promoting the
consideration of infrastructure alternatives, including green and decentralized alternatives, and ensuring
that systems have the financial capacity and rate structures to construct, operate, maintain, and replace
infrastructure over time. In this effort, EPA is working to ensure that federal dollars provided through
the CWSRF act as a catalyst for efficient system-wide planning; improvements in technical, financial, and
managerial capacity; and the design, construction, and ongoing management of sustainable water
infrastructure.
Today's water quality problems are often caused by many significant factors that are not adequately
addressed by these core programs, including loss of habitat and habitat fragmentation, hydrologic
alteration, invasive species, and climate change. Addressing complex water quality problems demands a
watershed systems approach to protection that considers both aquatic habitats and the critical
watershed processes that drive the condition of aquatic ecosystems. This approach is implemented by
states and at the local level through a comprehensive approach that leverages and integrates protection
activities of multiple stakeholder programs to protect the entire watershed system. As described under
Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure in Section II.C, to increase focus on
protecting and maintaining our Nation's remaining healthy waters, EPA is implementing a proactive
approach called HWI110.
EPA will continue to work with states, tribes, and other partners to strengthen capacities to identify and
protect high quality waters and watersheds. In an effort to promote and encourage the progress made
and still needed for statewide assessments that identify healthy watersheds, EPA developed a technical
document111 that provides a systems-based approach, examples of healthy watershed attribute
assessments, integrated assessment approaches, examples of management approaches, sources of
national data, and key assessment tools. The data and information gathered from both individual and
integrated assessments of landscape condition, habitat, hydrology, geomorphology, water quality, and
biological condition can help inform management approaches, including implementing water quality
and other protection programs. Regions are currently developing and/or implementing healthy
watersheds strategies. Activities underway include working with states to: (1) develop state watershed
protection strategies that include integrating healthy watersheds protection into existing programs; and
110 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm.
lnRead more at U.S. EPA (2012). Identifying and Protecting Healthy Watersheds Concepts, Assessments, and
Management Approaches. EPA 841-B-l 1-002. http ://water. epa. gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/hw techdocument. cfm.
http ://water. epa. gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 53 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
(2) conduct integrated assessments to identify healthy watersheds across the state and assess
hydrologic regimes needed for aquatic ecosystems.
EPA will continue to implement the HWI Action Plan112, including providing support for:
• Statewide integrated assessments that identify healthy watersheds and assessments of healthy
watershed components that build state capacity to improve protection of healthy watershed aquatic
ecosystems;
• Implementation of coordinated state programs that track and protect healthy watersheds;
• Implementation of strategies at the local level that protect watershed resilience;
• Integration of healthy watersheds protection into core water programs;
• Development of EPA Regional Healthy Watersheds Strategies;
• Continued collaboration with partners including other federal agencies, national state associations,
NGOs, and others; and
• Continued communication on the need to protect healthy watersheds, tools to assist healthy
watersheds efforts, and progress to date.
EPA has identified some 4,800 small watersheds where one or more waterbodies are impaired and the
watershed approach is being applied. The goal is to evaluate how the Watershed Approach is working by
showing a measurable improvement in 575 such watersheds by 2018 (see measure WQ-SP12.N11).
Regions are encouraged to use some or all of the following strategies in marshalling 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 measure targets;
• Coordinate waterbody restoration efforts with CWA Section 319 funds reserved for development of
watershed-based plans;
• Make effective use of SRFs provided under CWA Title VI;
• Make effective use of water quality planning funds provided under CWA Section 604(b);
• Leverage resources available from other federal agencies, including the USDA; and
• Apply funds appropriated by Congress for watershed or related projects.
In 2002, states identified some 39,503 specific waters as impaired (i.e., not attaining WQS). Since then,
the measures that track progress towards restoring impaired waters (see measures WQ-SP10.N11, WQ-
SP11, and WQ-SP12.N11) have continued to use this 2002 baseline. While states have taken significant
steps to improve impaired waters using the fixed 2002 baseline year, EPA recognizes that there are
concerns with continuing to measure progress regarding these measures against the 2002 baseline (e.g.,
does not account for water quality improvements when measured against waters/pollutants identified
as impaired and listed after establishment of the 2002 baseline, and continues to be a highly manual
process). In response, EPA completed an effort in FY 2014 with states to identify a potential replacement
measure for inclusion in the next EPA Strategic Plan (i.e., 2018). The proposed draft concepts for the
measures are:
A. Extent of area within a state where all assessed causes of impairment and/or designated uses
are now meeting water quality standards.
112 U. S. EPA (2011). Healthy Watersheds Initiative: National Framework and Action Plan. Office of Water. EPA
841-R-l 1-005.
Office of Water Page 54 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
B. Extent of area within a state where one or more of the assessed causes of impairment
and/or designated uses (a) have activities that are being implemented; and/or (b) are now
meeting water quality standards.
C. Extent of area within a state where unimpaired waters have been identified for protection
activities and continue to support water quality standards (i.e., designated uses).
Similar to the new 303(d) program measures previously discussed, EPA will use a new approach to track
water quality progress using the National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDP/t/s) to calculate watershed
area for using the NHDP/t/s 'catchments' to describe where water quality standards are being attained,
implementation of activities that will lead to water qualtiy standards attainment is occurring, and
protection activities are occurring to support continued water quality standards attainment. This
approach will consistently measure progress at the local scale, while allowing for tighter integration with
data and assessments at the state and national scale. In FY 2016, EPA will continue to work with states
on the development of these potential replacement measures.
In the interim, EPA will continue to track progress towards restoring impaired waters (WQ-SP10.N11,
WQ-SP11, and WQ-SP12.N11) using the 2002 baseline. EPA is committed to working with partners to
develop solutions that can be implemented in the future.
Estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans are among the most productive ecosystems on earth113. Healthy
ocean and coastal waters support fishing, recreation, tourism, and industry. Yet many challenges, such
as pollution from maritime and land-based sources, and climate change, have left these ecosystems and
our coastal communities vulnerable to degraded water quality, hypoxic zones, habitat loss, and
diminished fish, shellfish, and coral population. EPA works closely with other federal agencies, state,
Tribal, and local governments to address these challenges. For FY 2016-2017, EPA's national strategy for
improving the condition of coastal and ocean waters will include the key elements identified below:
1. develop strategies to protect and restore the quality of coastal and marine habitats, such as
estuaries and coral reefs, from many stressors, including climate change;
2. maintain coastal monitoring and assessment programs to inform policy and program decisions
for protection of the marine and near coastal environment;
3. ensure coastal and marine ecosystem protection by controlling and preventing pollutants from
land-based sources and vessels;
4. manage ocean dumping of dredged material and disposal of other pollutants in the ocean; and
5. develop strategies and programs to address emerging environmental threats to the marine and
coastal water quality such as ocean acidification and aquatic trash and debris.
1) Coastal Monitoring and Assessment. EPA has made improved monitoring of water quality
conditions114 a top priority for oceans, coasts, as well as inland waters. The National Coastal Condition
Reports (NCCRs) describe the ecological and environmental conditions in U.S. coastal waters115. In FY
2015, EPA will publish the National Coastal Condition Assessment 2010 Report (NCCA 2010 Report).
Building on coastal condition assessment reports issued in 2001, 2004, 2008, and 2012, the NCCA 2010
Report will describe the health of major marine eco-regions along the coasts of the U.S. and will depict
113 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/index.cfm.
114 For more information, please see http://water.epa. gov/tvpe/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/index.cfm.
115 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/index.cfm
Office of Water Page 55 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
assessment trends for the Nation and for individual marine eco-regions. The coastal condition
assessments are the basis for the measures of progress in estuarine and coastal water quality used in
the current EPA Strategic Plan.
In addition to changing the name of the report from the NCCR Vto the NCCA 2010 Report, the NCCA
program has undergone several other changes. The NCCA program is no longer an Office of Research
and Development research program; rather, it is now an Office of Water monitoring program conducted
under the auspices of the National Aquatic Resource Surveys (NARS). As such, the NCCA will assess the
estuarine and Great Lakes coastal condition every five years, rotating with the other NARS assessments.
Additionally, several indicators have been updated since the NCCR was published in 2012. As a result of
these changes, the NCCA program is deleting the coastal measure (CO-222.N11) and including it in the
NARS measure (WQ-SP13.N11), and aligning the language to read "Ensure that the condition of the
coastal waters does not degrade (i.e., there is no statistically significant increase in the percent of
coastal waters rated "poor" and no statistically significant decrease in the coastal waters rated "good"
based on the biological index)." This change would result in the results of the NCCA program only being
reported in the year when the reports are published.
2) State Coastal Programs. States play a critical role in protection of coastal waters through the
implementation of core CWA programs, ranging from permit programs to financing of wastewater
treatment plants. States also lead the implementation of efforts to assure the high quality of the
Nation's swimming beaches; including implementation of the BEACH Act (see the Water Safe for
Swimming Subobjective).
EPA will continue to coordinate with states interested in establishing "no discharge zones" (NDZ) to
control vessel sewage under the CWA. This process will include answering any questions or concerns
regarding the establishment of NDZs, and providing states with guidance on NDZ applications to allow
for adequate EPA review.
3) Implement NEP116. The overall health of the Nation's estuarine ecosystems depends on the protection
and restoration of high-quality habitat and water quality. The National Estuary Program (NEP) is a local,
stakeholder-driven, voluntary program whose broad goal is to protect and restore the water quality and
ecological integrity of estuaries of national significance known as National Estuary Programs. The goals
and objectives of each NEP are identified in their Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans
(CCMPs). There are 28 estuaries of national significance, or NEPs, located along the east, west, Gulf
coasts as well as in Puerto Rico. EPA will continue supporting the NEPs' implementation of their
individual CCMPs.
4) Climate Ready Estuaries"117: EPA will continue to build capacity within the NEP to adapt to the
impacts of climate change on the coasts. EPA will provide additional assistance and technical support to
individual NEPs in support of NEP efforts to conduct risk-based vulnerability assessments and to develop
adaptation plans for NEP study areas.
5) Ocean Protection Programs. EPA addresses a number of critical environmental issues with its ocean
protection programs.
Ocean dumping: To ensure U.S. ports can be reached by large sea-going vessels, several hundred million
cubic yards of sediment are dredged each year from U.S. waterways, ports, and harbors. EPA's ocean
dumping management program regulates ocean dumping (including disposal of wastes and dredged
material) to protect the environment from any material that will degrade or endanger human health,
116 Read more on NEPs at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/nep/index.cfm.
117 Read on Climate Ready Estuaries at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/cre/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 56 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
welfare, or amenities, the marine environment, ecological systems, and/or economic opportunities.
Under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), EPA is responsible for issuing
ocean dumping permits for all materials other than dredged material. In the case of dredged material,
the decision to issue an MPRSA permit is made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), using EPA's
environmental criteria and subject to EPA's concurrence. EPA is responsible for designating and
managing recommended ocean dumping sites for all types of materials.
EPA will continue to monitor active dredged material ocean dump sites nationwide to ensure
achievement of environmentally acceptable conditions, as reflected in each site's management
and monitoring plan. EPA will secure vessels to support ocean dumping monitoring activities,
manage MPRSA permits and ocean disposal site designations, and assess impacts from ocean dumping
in the marine environment. EPA will work with USAGE and other agencies to improve dredged material
disposal and management, involving local stakeholders and working to increase the beneficial use of
dredged material. EPA will continue to participate with other nations to support the effective
international regulation of ocean dumping, including sub-seabed sequestration of carbon, and marine
geoengineering (e.g., fertilization of the ocean) through the London Convention and Protocol.
Ocean and coastal acidification: EPA will continue work with federal, state, and private sector
stakeholders to address the issue of rising acidity levels in near coastal and marine waters. Such work
will include pH trend monitoring, analytical research on land-based acidification sources and impacts,
assessment of societal cost impacts of acidification on local economies, and facilitation of public
dialogue to develop and implement mitigation strategies.
Coral reef protection: EPA headquarters and regions will address coral reef degradation and death
resulting from increased acidification, as well as from other land-based stressors, such as nutrient runoff
and marine trash. The Agency will foster a greater public awareness among policy makers and the
general public of the nexus between climate change and coral reef decline.
Pollution from vessels, marinas, and ports: EPA will assess the impacts of pollutants from vessel-related
activities and locations. Such pollutants include vessel sewage, invasive species, pathogens and oil from
vessel bilge and gray water, metals from hull coatings, heavy metals from dredged materials, and
pollutants in stormwater run-off. Analyses will inform regulatory and/or non-regulatory program
development to address sewage discharge, clean boating and marina operations, port and shipping-
related water quality initiatives, and the promulgation of Uniform National Discharge Standards
governing discharges from military vessels.
Trash Free Waters: EPA will continue implementation of this program to prevent loadings of trash into
water, which was identified in 2014 as a U.S. Government priority at the State Department "One Ocean"
conference. Trash Free Waters activities include research on ecological and possible human health
effects from aquatic trash (particularly microplastics); the development of regional strategies in
collaboration with states, municipalities, and others; and implementation of a national challenge
program with major business sectors to achieve zero loadings through innovative technologies,
messaging, product design, growth of material recovery markets, etc.
Seeking Comment: The EPA has a suite of existing measures that track ocean protection and restoration
progress. However, the EPA believes that our existing measures may not fully capture the progress and
achievements being made. The EPA is seeking comments from states, tribes and other stakeholders on
whether the existing measures are the best measures for tracking progress and which existing
measures, if any, should be decommissioned to possibly make way for new measures. We also invite
Office of Water Page 57 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
comment on whether there are other ways to measure or explain program progress and/or
achievements.
CO-432.N11 tracks the number of habitat acres protected or restored within NEP study areas.
CO-SP20.N11 tracks the percent of active ocean dredged material disposal sites that have achieved
environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan and measured
through on-site monitoring programs).
CO-02 tracks total coastal and noncoastal statutory square miles protected by NDZs.
CO-04 tracks the cash and in-kind resources that NEP directors and staff obtain to fund the
implementation of their CCMP.
CO-06 tracks monitoring activities at active ocean dredged material sites.
EPA's Wetlands Program118 combines technical and financial assistance to state, tribal, and local
partners with outreach and education, in addition to wetlands regulation under CWA Section 404 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. Through a collaborative effort with our many partners culminating in a May 2008
report, EPA's Wetlands Program articulated a set of national strategies in the areas of monitoring, state
and tribal capacity, regulatory programs, jurisdictional determinations, and restoration partnerships.
No Net Loss. EPA contributes to achieving no overall net loss of wetlands through the wetlands
regulatory program established under CWA Section 404119. USAGE is the principal permitting agency for
the CWA Section 404 permits, but EPA has a statutory role to provide input to USAGE as it reviews
proposed discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands. EPA also has a
statutory role to oversee states that assume the CWA Section 404 permitting program.
EPA will support states that decide to explore assumption of the CWA Section 404 permitting program
from the USAGE. Additional states are anticipated to start pre-assumption activities and others may
formally apply for 404 assumption based on an increased interest by states in streamlining regulatory
programs and other reasons.
EPA will continue to work with USAGE to ensure application of the CWA Section 404(b)(l) 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 for. Part of this work
also includes making jurisdictional determinations consistent with the 2015 Clean Water Rule120.
• EPA regions should identify whether USAGE issuing a CWA Section 404 permit would result in
adverse human health or environmental effects on low-income and minority populations, including
impacts to water supplies and fisheries. Where such effects are likely, EPA regions should suggest
ways and measures to avoid and/or mitigate such impacts through comments to USAGE.
• EPA regions should continue to identify instances where the EPA may need to prohibit, deny, or
restrict the use of waters as a disposal site (Section 404(c)) or elevate specific proposed USAGE
permit decisions to Army Headquarters (Section 404(q)).
118 Read more on wetlands at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/wetlands/index.cfm.
119 Read more on CWA Section 404 at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/cwa/dredgdis/.
120Formore information: http://www2.epa.gov/uswaters
Office of Water Page 58 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
• States and tribes can assist EPA in these reviews by sharing their CWA Section 401 certifications on
USAGE permits121.
• Each EPA region will also identify opportunities to partner with USAGE in meeting performance
measures for compliance with 404(b)(l) 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 Interagency Review Team activities;
• Assistance on development of mitigation site performance standards and monitoring protocols; and
• Enhanced coordination on resolution of enforcement cases.
Net Gain Goal. 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 USFWS and non-federal programs). EPA will work to improve
levels of wetland protection by states and via EPA and other federal programs through actions that
include:
• Working with and integrating wetlands protection into other EPA programs, such as CWA Section
319, SRF, NEP, and Brownfields;
• Providing grants and technical assistance to state, tribal, or local organizations;
• Developing technical assistance and informational tools for wetlands protection; and
• Expanding collaboration with USDA, Department of the Interior, NOAA, and other federal agencies
with wetlands restoration programs to ensure the greatest environmental outcomes and non-
governmental organizations whose mission and activities include protection and restoration of
wetland resources. Emphasis will be placed on restoration of wetlands in the Gulf of Mexico states
and on projects increasing the resiliency of wetlands to climate change and enhancing the ecologic
services associated with wetland systems.
For FY 2016-2017, EPA expects to track the following key activities for accomplishing its wetland goals:
Wetlands Restored and Enhanced Through Partnerships: EPA will track this commitment as a sub-set of
the overall net gain goal and will track and report the results separately under measure WT-01. These
acres may include those supported by Wetland Five-Star Restoration Grants, NEP, CWA Section 319 NPS
grants, Brownfield grants, EPA's Great Waterbody Programs, and other EPA programs. This does not
include enforcement or mitigation acres.
State/Tribal Programs122: EPA is enhancing its support for state and tribal wetland programs by
providing more directed technical assistance and making refinements to the Wetland Program
Development Grants. In reporting progress under measure WT-02a, EPA will assess the number of states
and tribes that have substantially increased their capacity in one or more core elements. This is an
indicator measure.
Regulatory Program Performance: Data on Aquatic Resources Tracking for Effective Regulation
(DARTER) is EPA's system to manage its workflow in CWA Section 404 permit program. DARTER allows
EPA staff to track agency involvement in pre-application coordination, review of public notices for
proposed permits, and access shared data from USACE's national regulatory program data management
121 Read more on CWA Section 401 at http ://water. epa. gov/tvpe/wetlands/outreach/fact24. cfm .
122 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/rvpe/wetlands/estp.cfm.
Office of Water Page 59 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
system, known as OMBIL123 Regulatory Module (ORM2). Using ORM 2.0 and DARTER as a data source,
measure WT-03 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.
Wetland Monitoring124: 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. Part of this
work is the N WCA, which provides a statistically valid assessment of the ecological condition of the
Nation's wetlands, thus providing a baseline data layer that could be used in subsequent years to gauge
changes in wetland condition and potentially the impacts of climate change on wetland ecological
integrity. Field work for the second survey will commence in FY 2016. Progress by states in developing
their monitoring capacity is tracked in measure WT-02a. Examples of activities indicating the state is "on
track" include, but are not limited to:
• Building technical and financial capacity to conduct state scale studies of wetland condition apart
from or in conjunction with EPA's NWCAs;
• Developing or adapting wetland assessment tools for use in the state;
• Monitoring activity that are underway for wetland type(s)/watershed(s) stated in strategy or goals;
and
• Developing a monitoring strategy with a goal of evaluating baseline wetland condition. Baseline
condition may be established using landscape assessment (Tier 1), rapid assessment (Tier 2), or
intensive site assessment (Tier 3).
• Develop plans to document trends in wetland condition over time.
Seeking Comment: The EPA has a suite of existing measures that track wetlands protection and
restoration progress. However, the EPA believes that our existing measures may not fully capture the
progress and achievements being made. The EPA is seeking comments from states, tribes and other
stakeholders on whether the existing measures are the best measures for tracking progress and which
existing measures, if any, should be decommissioned to possibly make way for new measures. We also
invite comment on whether there are other ways to measure or explain program progress and/or
achievements.
• WT-SP22 tracks the overall net loss of wetlands resulting from regulatory actions.
• WT-01 tracks acres restored and improved through partnerships.
• WT-02a reflects EPA's goal of increasing state and tribal capacity in these core wetland management
areas.
• WT-03 tracks the effectiveness of EPA's environmental review of CWA Section 404 permits.
123 Operations and Maintenance Business Information Link (OMBIL)
124 Read more on wetland monitoring at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/wetlands/assessment/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 60 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
The goal of EPA's Great Lakes program125 is to restore and maintain the environmental integrity of the
Great Lakes ecosystem, as mandated by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)126, the Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement, and CWA. As the primary means of accomplishing this goal, EPA leads the
Interagency Task Force in implementation of the FY 2015 to FY 2019 GLRI Action Plan127. This
interagency collaboration accelerates progress, avoids potential duplication of effort, and saves money.
Through a coordinated interagency process led by EPA, implementation of GLRI is helping to restore the
Great Lakes ecosystem, enhance the economic health of the region, and ultimately improve the public
health of the area's 30 million Americans.
EPA works with its GLRI partners to select the best combination of programs and projects for Great
Lakes restoration and protection based on criteria, such as feasibility of prompt implementation and
timely achievement of measurable outcomes. Special emphasis will continue to be placed on: 1)
cleaning up and de-listing Areas of Concern; 2) reducing phosphorus contributions from agricultural and
urban lands that contribute to harmful algal blooms and other water quality impairments; and 3)
invasive species prevention. Key expected activities for FY 2016 and FY 2017 are described below.
Remediate, Restore, and Delist Areas of Concern (AOCs). EPA and its partners will continue accelerating
the pace of U.S. AOC delistings. EPA and its federal partners will work with and fund stakeholders to
remove BUIs (indicators of poor environmental health) and implement management actions necessary
for delisting in the remaining U.S. AOCs. Agencies will support BUI removal through sediment
remediation under the Great Lakes Legacy Act (part of the GLRI) and other restoration activities.
Increase knowledge about contaminants in Great Lakes fish and wildlife. Federal agencies and their
partners will provide information on the health risks and benefits of Great Lakes fish consumption and
evaluate emerging contaminants that have the greatest potential to adversely impact Great Lakes fish
and wildlife.
Invasive Species. Federal agencies and their partners will continue to prevent new invasive species,
including Asian Carp, from establishing self-sustaining Great Lakes populations and to increase the
effectiveness of existing surveillance programs by establishing a coordinated, multi-species early
detection network. Federal agencies will support state and tribal development and implementation of
Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plans, including "readiness exercises" and responses to new
detections. Grants will fund initiatives to block invasive species pathways of introduction to the Great
Lakes ecosystem. Risk assessments will be refined to inform the targeting of species, pathways, and sites
for early detection monitoring. Federal agencies will restore sites degraded by invasive species;
implement control projects in national forests, parks and wildlife refuges; and promote large scale
protection and restoration through partnerships. Federal agencies and their partners will continue to
develop and enhance technologies to control Great Lakes invasive species; develop and enhance
invasive species "collaboratives" to support rapid responses and to communicate the latest control and
management techniques; and support development or enhancement of species-specific collaborations.
125 For more information, please see http://epa.gov/greatlakes/.
126 For more information, please see http://epa.gov/greatlakes/glri/index.html.
127 For more information, please see http://glri.us/actionplan/index.html.
Office of Water Page 61 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Reduce nutrient loads from agricultural watersheds and untreated runoff from urban watersheds.
Federal agencies and their partners will continue to reduce nutrient runoff in watersheds targeted
through the GLRI science-based adaptive management process. The work will: advance drinking water
source protection, increase voluntary agricultural conservation practices to achieve downstream water
quality improvements; and use voluntary, incentive-based and existing regulatory approaches to reduce
nutrient losses. Federal agencies and their partners will develop assessments of the extent to which
harmful algal blooms are impacted by various factors and of the relationship between algal blooms and
hypoxia. Federal agencies and their partners will continue to implement watershed management and
green infrastructure projects to reduce the impacts of polluted urban runoff on nearshore water quality
at beaches and in other coastal areas. In urban areas that have adopted watershed management
strategies, projects will capture or slow the flow of untreated runoff and filter out sediment, nutrients,
toxic contaminants, pathogens, and other pollutants prior to entering Great Lakes tributaries and
nearshore waters; support green infrastructure; install tributary buffers; restore coastal wetlands; and
re-vegetate and re-forest areas near Great Lakes coasts and tributaries.
Protect, restore and enhance habitats to help sustain healthy populations of native species. Federal
agencies and their partners will implement protection, restoration, and enhancement projects focused
on open water, nearshore, connecting channels, coastal wetland and other habitats. Projects will be
largely based on priorities in regional-scale conservation strategies and will include: removing dams and
replacing culverts; restoring riparian and in-stream habitat: protecting and restoring coastal wetlands;
restoring habitat necessary to sustain populations of migratory native species; implementing off shore
reef rehabilitation projects; and protecting, restoring, and managing existing wetlands and high-quality
upland areas.
Maintain, restore and enhance populations of native species. Federal agencies and their partners will
work to maintain, restore and enhance populations of native fish and wildlife species. Projects will be
targeted based on restoration and conservation plans and will: protect and restore species diversity;
reintroduce populations of native species to restored habitats and evaluate their survival; protect or
restore culturally significant species; manage invasive species that inhibit the sustainability of native
species; pioneer species propagation and relocation techniques; and implement other activities
necessary for the eventual recovery of federal and state threatened and endangered species.
Ensure climate resilience of GLRI-funded projects. Federal agencies will develop standardized climate
resiliency criteria that will be used to design and select GLRI projects. These criteria will ensure, for
example, that GLRI restoration projects incorporate plant and tree species that are suitable for current
and projected future climatic conditions. Similarly, these criteria will be used to design watershed
restoration projects to take into account potential impacts of more frequent or intense storms on water
flow, erosion, and runoff.
Educate the next generation about the Great Lakes ecosystem objectives. Federal agencies and their
partners will promote Great Lakes-based environmental education and stewardship for students and
other interested audiences. GLRI partners will work with existing environmental education programs,
foster the growth of new programs, and align new and/or existing curricula with the Great Lakes Literacy
Principles as well as state and national academic learning standards. Federal agencies that are stewards
of lands and waters important to the Great Lakes ecosystem will also provide place-based experiential
learning to the public.
Office of Water Page 62 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Implement a science-based adaptive management approach for GLRI. The GLRI science-based adaptive
management process128 will guide restoration and protection actions by using the best available science
and applying lessons learned from past and ongoing GLRI projects and programs. Federal agencies
involved in the GLRI will use this process to continue to identify the most critical environmental
problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem and to select projects that will most effectively address those
problems. As part of this process, federal agencies will consult with their state and tribal partners and
will seek input from the Great Lakes Advisory Board, the scientific community, Lakewide Action and
Management Plan partnerships, and the general public.
The Great Lakes Program has a suite of 10 measures.
The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP)129 is a unique regional partnership that has coordinated and
conducted the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay since 1983. EPA is the lead federal agency on the
Chesapeake Executive Council (EC). In addition to the EPA Administrator, the EC consists of the
governors of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, the mayor of the
District of Columbia, and the chair of the Chesapeake Bay Commission. On June 16, 2014, Chesapeake
Bay Program partners signed the new Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, which provides for the
first time the Bay's headwater states (Delaware, New York, and West Virginia) with full partnership in
the Bay program.
EPA's focus in FY 2016-2017 will be to continue progress to restore the Bay's ecosystem and improve
water quality by reducing loadings of phosphorous, nitrogen, and sediment to achieve the President's
expectations as described in Executive Order 13508. The will continue implementing the Chesapeake
Bay TMDL, considering necessary actions, providing states with the tools necessary for effective
regulatory implementation, creating better tools for scientific analysis and accountability, and
supporting regulatory compliance and enforcement. Through FY 2016, EPA will work with the Bay
watershed jurisdictions to prepare for the FY 2017 TMDL midpoint assessment, a comprehensive review
of TMDL progress made to date. The midpoint assessment will inform revisions of the Bay watershed
jurisdictions' Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs), which identify the actions the jurisdictions will
take to meet their TMDL goals and targets.
Moreover, the new Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement establishes 10 goals and 31 outcomes for
sustainable fisheries, water quality, vital habitats, climate change, toxic contaminants, land
conservation, stewardship, environmental literacy, public access, and other areas consistent with the EO
strategy.130 EPA and its partners are developing management strategies in FY 2015 to achieve the
agreement's goals and outcomes and will be implementing those strategies in FY 2016.
EPA strongly believes that local governments are critical partners in implementing the TMDL and is
working to ensure that the states provide necessary support to local governments as they take the on-
128 Two science-based planning processes area involved — one that occurs every five years and one that is
implemented annually. Every five years, federal agencies develop a GLRI Action Plan to establish principal
initiatives, commitments, metrics, and long-term goals. Federal agencies also conduct annual planning to identify
specific projects and programs to target the highest priority problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
129 Read more on the CBP at http://www.epa.gov/region3/chesapeake/ and http://www.chesapeakebav.net/.
130 The 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement is available at
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/chesapeakebaywatershedagreement/page.
Office of Water Page 63 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
the-ground actions necessary to achieve the goals of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. EPA will continue to
implement key initiatives under Executive Order 13508, the jurisdictions' WIPs, and the Watershed
Agreement, including: implementing the TMDL; assisting states in implementing and improving their
WIPs; conducting evaluations of WIPs and milestones; maintaining oversight of state permitting and
compliance actions for source sectors; improving a publicly accessible TMDL tracking and accountability
system; improving transparency and accountability in the development and implementation of
management strategies; deploying technology to integrate discrete Bay data systems and to present the
data in an accessible accountability system called ChesapeakeStat; and moving forward on the Bay's
challenges related to toxic contaminants.
In FY 2016-2017, EPA will continue its close work with the states and thousands of local governments
that will be instrumental in meeting the TMDL allocations by providing implementation support and
guidance to achieve the most efficient implementation of the TMDL. EPA will assist the jurisdictions in
making scientifically informed determinations of the most effective ways to meet their TMDL obligations
that will provide individually tailored solutions. Also, EPA will continue to work with the Bay jurisdictions
to refine and implement state-developed nutrient offset and trading programs to aid in identifying cost-
effective solutions for meeting the TMDL waste load and load allocations throughout the watershed.
EPA will continue to support implementation of innovative environmental market mechanisms as a
means of effectively achieving the goals of the TMDL. The Chesapeake Bay TMDL establishes the
expectation that the Bay jurisdictions will expand or establish nutrient credit trading and offset
programs to allow development while continuing to reduce pollutant loads to the Bay and its tributaries.
EPA has developed a series of technical memoranda on critical issues related to water quality trading
and offsets to assist the jurisdictions with development and enhancement of their trading and offset
programs.131
To ensure that the states are able to meet EPA's expectations under the TMDL and any new
rulemakings, EPA will continue its broad range of grant programs and will prioritize funding to
jurisdictions that are demonstrating progress. EPA will direct investments toward local governments and
watershed organizations based on their ability to reduce nutrient and sediment loads via key sectors
such as development and agriculture in urban and rural areas. EPA has continued to improve its
guidance for accountability and implementation grants to ensure a high level of accountability for the
use of these resources. These grants are an essential part of achieving the goals established for the
Chesapeake Bay and its watershed.
EPA's CBP is committed to a high level of accountability and transparency with the public and other key
stakeholders. ChesapeakeStat is a key element in the next generation of tools that EPA is developing to
significantly enhance the accountability of program partners. ChesapeakeStat is a web based, geo-
enabled tool for performance-based interactive decision-making for all Bay partners. The system allows
the public to track progress and become informed and engaged in restoring the Bay. In FY 2016 and FY
2017, the Agency will continue refining and improving ChesapeakeStat by better integrating additional
data to track implementation of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL EPA also established two-year milestones for
the outcomes outlined in the Executive Order strategy. The second set of the two-year milestones was
released in January 2014 and covers calendar years 2014 and 2015132. To ensure that the Bay
jurisdictions are effectively implementing the TMDL, EPA will improve and expand the Bay Tracking and
131 EPA's technical memoranda for water quality trading and offsets in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are available
at http://www.epa.gov/reg3 wapd/tmdl/ChesapeakeBay/EnsuringResults.html?tab2=7.
132 The milestones related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are available at
http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/file.axd?file=2014%2fl%2fl4_15+WQ+milestones_010714+FINAL+Vers
ionpdf.
Office of Water Page 64 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Accountability System (BayTAS). EPA also will begin implementing the Chesapeake Bay Accountability
and Recovery Act of 2014, which requires new financial reporting and evaluation of the program.
EPA will continue to enhance and improve the CBP's water quality monitoring network to better track
TMDL progress, as well as developing new indicators and monitoring systems required under the new
Watershed Agreement. EPA will invest in bringing more non-traditional monitoring partners, including
watershed organizations, permittees, and local governments into the monitoring network, increasing
the data available to assess stream and Bay health and responses to management actions.
In FY 2016 and FY 2017, the continued implementation of the Compliance and Enforcement Strategy for
the Bay Watershed will target sources of pollution impairing the Bay in the watershed and airshed. The
strategy combines the Agency's water, air and waste enforcement authorities to address violations of
federal environmental laws resulting in nutrient, sediment, and other pollution in the Bay.
• CB-05.N14 tracks attainment of water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, water
clarity/underwater grasses, and chlorophyll a.
• CB-SP35, CB-SP36, and CB-SP37 track nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment reduction in the Bay,
respectively.
The Gulf of Mexico basin133 has been called "America's Watershed". Its U.S. coastline is 1,630 miles; it is
fed by 33 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 40% of the Nation's
commercial fishery landings, and Gulf Coast wetlands comprise about half the national total and provide
critical habitat for 75% of the migratory waterfowl traversing the U.S.
Enhance and/or Protect Coastal Habitat and Ecosystems. Reversing ongoing habitat degradation and
preserving the remaining healthy habitats is necessary to protect the communities, cultures, and
economy of the Gulf Coast. For decades, the Gulf Coast has endured extensive damage to key habitats,
such as coastal wetlands, estuaries, barrier islands, upland habitats, seagrass beds, oyster reefs, corals,
and offshore habitats. 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 restoring the health of the Gulf aquatic
system. The Gulf of Mexico Program Office will enhance cooperative planning and programs across the
Gulf States and federal agencies to protect wetland and estuarine habitat.
The wise management of sediments for wetland creation, enhancement, and sustainability is of critical
importance to the Gulf Coast region, especially given locally high rates of subsidence, or settling, and the
region-wide threat from potential future impacts of climate change, including rising water levels. To
successfully sustain and enhance coastal ecosystems, a broad sediment management effort is needed
that incorporates beneficial use of dredge material, and other means of capturing all available sediment
resources.
Improve Water Quality. Jhe 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, which
contributes pollution, especially oxygen demanding nutrients, to the Gulf. Enhanced monitoring and
133 Read more on the Gulf of Mexico Program at http://www.epa.gov/gmpo/.
Office of Water Page 65 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
research is needed in the Gulf Coast region to make data more readily available. EPA regional offices 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. These efforts will 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. The Gulf of Mexico Program
Office also partners with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA Applied Science,
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Geological Survey in support of this goal.
Specifically in FY 2016, the Gulf of Mexico Program Office will address excessive nutrient loadings that
contribute to hypoxic conditions in the Gulf of Mexico. Working with the Hypoxia Task Force, and the
states within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River Basins, and other federal agencies, the Gulf of Mexico
Program Office will continue to support nutrient reduction strategies that include an accountability
framework for point and nonpoint sources contributing nitrogen and phosphorus loading to the Gulf, as
well as watershed plans that provide a road map for addressing nonpoint sources. EPA will continue to
coordinate with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and with federal and state partners to support
monitoring best management practices and water quality improvement. With key partners, the Gulf of
Mexico Program Office will leverage resources to focus wetland restoration and development, as well as
habitat restoration efforts toward projects within the Mississippi River Basin that will sequester
nutrients from targeted watersheds and tributaries.
Enhance Community Resilience. The Gulf Coastal communities continuously face and adapt to various
challenges of living along the Gulf of Mexico, such as storm risk, sea-level rise, land and habitat loss,
depletion of natural resources, and compromised water quality. The economic, ecological, and social
losses from coastal hazard events have grown as population growth places people in harm's way and as
the ecosystems' natural resilience is compromised by development and pollution. In order to sustain
and grow the Gulf region's economic prosperity, individuals, businesses, communities, and ecosystems
all need to be more adaptable to change. In FY 2016, the Gulf of Mexico Program Office will assist with
the development of information, tools, technologies, products, policies, or public decision processes
that can be used by coastal communities to increase resilience to coastal natural hazards and sea level
rise. The Gulf of Mexico Program Office works extensively and collaboratively with multiple agencies
that share responsibility in this area, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
Sea Grant Programs and the U.S. Geological Survey.
Environmental Education. Environmental education and outreach are essential to accomplish the Gulf
of Mexico Program Office goal to promote and provide for healthy and resilient coastal habitats. Gulf
residents and decision-makers need to understand and appreciate the connection between the 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 also 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 EPA's long-term goal is
to increase awareness and stewardship of Gulf coastal resources and promote action among Gulf
citizens.
The Gulf of Mexico Program Office previously tracked performance with the following measures, - only
one of which will continue through the end of FY 2016 (see bold text):
• GM-SP38 tracks restored segments in 13 priority areas in the Gulf.GM-SP39 tracks cumulative acres
restored, enhanced, or protected in the Gulf.
Office of Water Page 66 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
GM-SP40.N11 is a long term measure tracking the size of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf.Howovor, during
During FY 2014, a replacement was requested and approved by OMB for measure GM-SP38. The new
measure language states "Improve and/or restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality
standards in watersheds throughout the five Gulf States and the Mississippi River Basin." This change
better reflects how the program office implements competitively funded projects and the partnerships
which improve water and habitat quality. Additional performance measure changes have been
submitted and are under review and consideration.
EPA coordinates the Long Island Sound Study (LISS)134 as an estuary of national significance and as a
large aquatic ecosystem under Clean Water Act (CWA) Sections 320 and 119. EPA core environmental
management and regulatory control programs supplement and support the work of LISS Management
Conference partners, to implement the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP),
established under CWA Section 320. The LISS is a partnership of federal, state and local governments,
private industry, tribes, academia and the public that supports and funds the cleanup and restoration of
the Sound. This cooperative environmental partnership relies on existing federal, state and local
regulatory frameworks, programs, and funding to achieve restoration and protection goals.
EPA will continue to work with the LISS Management Conference partners - the states of New York and
Connecticut and other federal, state, and local government agencies, tribes, academia, industry, and the
private sector - to implement the 2015 revised CCMP to restore and protect the Sound. Because the
level of dissolved oxygen (DO) is critical to the health of aquatic life and to viable public and commercial
use of the Sound, a major EPA and CCMP priority is controlling anthropogenic nitrogen sources to meet
this water quality standard. Activities for FY 2016-2017 include:
• EPA will continue to work with the five watershed states (Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, and Vermont) to maintain and improve the nitrogen TMDL limits through
innovative techniques, such as nutrient bioextraction through shellfish and seaweed farming and
other nonpoint source management efforts, and
• EPA will continue to support LISS partner efforts to implement new CCMP priorities through the
Long Island Sound Futures Fund grant program, the Long Island Sound scientific research priorities,
and through ongoing base program efforts that fund key partners' staff to monitor and assess water
quality, climate change effects on ecosystem indicators, and to inform and involve the public to
protect and restore the Sound.
• LI-SP41 tracks the progress in reducing trade-equalized point source nitrogen discharges to LIS.
• LI-SP42.N11 tracks the size in square miles of the observed maximum area of hypoxia in LIS.
• LI-SP43 tracks acres of coastal habitat restored, protected, or enhanced.
• LI-SP44 tracks the miles of river and stream corridors reopened to diadromous fish passage.
The Puget Sound in Washington State, the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and the Georgia Basin to the north in
Canada, together make up the Salish Sea; The Salish Sea ecosystem is the homeland of the Coast Salish
people, comprising 19 tribes in the U.S. and 55 First Nations in Canada. The pressures from the Salish
134 Read more on LISS at http://longislandsoundstudv.net/.
Office of Water Page 67 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Sea basin's seven million inhabitants (expected to increase to over nine million by 2025) on the
ecosystem are substantial. The Puget Sound basin represents the largest population and commercial
center in the Pacific Northwest and the waters of Puget Sound provide a vital system of international
ports, transportation systems, and defense installations. The EPA's Puget Sound Program135 works to
ensure that the natural, cultural, and economic benefits of the Puget Sound ecosystem are protected
and sustained, today and into the future. EPA has taken important steps to coordinate transboundary
efforts with Canadian agencies and forge mutual commitments to protect and restore the ecosystem's
resources.
Tribal priorities
In FY 2016-2017, EPA will work to ensure that appropriated funding is achieving net increases in
protected and restored riparian habitat with particular emphasis on salmon and shellfish areas, so that
the inherent tribal rights associated with these natural resources are protected. Region 10's Puget
Sound Program will consider and support where possible, the priorities of the 19 Puget Sound tribes and
tribal consortiums with assistance agreement funding. EPA will also continue to respond to issues
expressed in the 2011 Treaty Rights at Risk white paper.
In FY 2016-FY2017, EPA's Puget Sound program is working with NOAA and USDA/NRCS, as well as the
Puget Sound Federal Caucus, Puget Sound Tribes, the State of Washington, and other stakeholders to
develop and fund an effective coordinated investment strategy for restoring and protecting vital
ecological resources with particular emphasis on riparian areas.
Action Agenda Implementation Strategies
In FY 2016-2017, EPA's Puget Sound Program will fund and support the implementation of the Puget
Sound Action Agenda136, which is the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan (CCMP) approved
under the National Estuary Program.
Activities will carry out selected implementation strategies that serve as the pathways to achieve the
targets in the Puget Sound Action Agenda. In FY 2016, the initial implementation strategies are still to be
determined but will address such issues as:
• Increasing the abundance of endangered Chinook salmon stocks primarily through riparian and
near shore habitat restoration and protection.
• Restoring estuarine habitat to gain 7,380 acres by 2020.
• Restoring flood plain function to achieve multi-benefit outcomes in important Puget Sound
watersheds.
• Increasing eelgrass acreage to 120% of the extent of areas measured from 2000 to 2008.
• Sustaining Pollution Identification and Correction (PIC) programs and supporting water quality
actions to upgrade shellfish growing areas to achieve a net increase of 10,800 approved
shellfish harvest acres by 2020.
• Reducing the effects of stormwater pollution to achieve freshwater quality improvements as
measured by the benthic index of biotic integrity (BIBI), a performance measure in development
by the Puget Sound program.
135 Read more on the Puget Sound Program at http://www.epa.gov/pugetsound/index.html.
136http://www.psp.wa.gov/action_agenda_center.php
Office of Water Page 68 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Additional implementation strategies to support the Action Agenda's vital sign indicators are planned for
subsequent development in FY 2017 and beyond.
The Puget Sound program is building climate resiliency into the actions and projects funded with Puget
Sound assistance agreements for habitat, shellfish, and water quality. The program includes regional and
national climate adaptation and resiliency criteria in all applicable funding solicitations. Applications and
workplans are evaluated for inclusion of climate related project design and factors to increase resiliency.
Addressing ocean acidification, floodplain and riparian area protection and restoration, improved
stormwater management to protect water quality and hydrology for maintaining aquatic habitats are all
examples of prioritized work in the Puget Sound Action Agenda that contribute directly to climate
change resiliency.
OW performance measures for the Puget Sound program reflect EPA's commitment to protect water
quality and restore habitat to levels that reverse the trends threatening salmon and shellfish resources.
PS-SP49.N11 tracks acres of shellfish beds growing areas with the lifting of harvest restrictions. PS-SP51
tracks acres or shoreline miles of aquatic habitats protected or restored including: estuaries; floodplains;
marine and freshwater shorelines; riparian areas; stream habitats; and associated wetlands.
The U.S. and Mexico have a long-standing commitment to protect the environment and public health for
communities in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region137. The bi-national agreement that guides efforts to
improve environmental conditions in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region is the Border 2020 framework"8.
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 NAFTA139-created institutions, the Border Environment
Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American Development Bank (NADB), have worked
closely 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.
Under the Border 2020 Plan, EPA expects to take the following key actions to improve water quality and
protect public health.
Core Program Implementation: EPA will continue to implement core programs under the CWA and
related authorities, ranging from discharge permit issuance, to watershed restoration, to nonpoint
pollution control. Specific activities to be accomplished in FY 2016-2017 include:
• Complete BECC/NADB Board project certifications.
• Complete construction of Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF) projects.
• Incorporate sustainable infrastructure elements into selected certified projects.
• Conduct energy efficiency and water conservation audits at selected border drinking water and
wastewater utilities to improve sustainability of the infrastructure
137 Read more on the U.S.-Mexico Border Program at http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/ and
http ://water. epa. gov/infrastructure/wastewater/mexican/index. cfm.
138 Read more on Border 2020 at http://www.epa.gov/border2020/framework/index.html.
139 North American Free Trade Agreement
Office of Water Page 69 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Drinking Water and Wastewater Treatment Financing: In FY 2016, EPA plans to provide approximately
$5 million for planning, design, and construction of drinking water and wastewater facilities.
Build Partnerships: EPA will continue to support the BECC and NADB and work collaboratively with
Mexico's National Water Commission (CONAGUA) and other federal, state, and local partners in the
implementation of the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program.
The FY 2016 targets will be achieved through the completion of prioritized BEIF drinking water and
wastewater infrastructure projects.
• MB-SP23 tracks loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removed from the border area.
• MB-SP24.N11 tracks the annual number of additional homes provided with safe drinking water.
• MB-SP25.N11 tracks the annual number of additional homes provided with adequate sanitation.
The U.S. Pacific Island territories of Guam, American Samoa, and CNMI struggle to provide adequate
drinking water and sanitation service. EPA is targeting the use of existing grants, enforcement, and
technical assistance to improve drinking water and wastewater quality in the Pacific Islands. In pursuing
these actions, EPA will continue to use available resources and to work with partners at both the federal
and local levels to seek improvements. These efforts are intended to move the Pacific Island systems
toward compliance with U.S. standards.140
In American Samoa, EPA will work with the local utility to conduct a program review of drinking
water and wastewater infrastructure spending and provide enhanced technical assistance. With EPA
support, the utility will strive to eliminate boil water notices by developing new, clean drinking
water sources, upgrading treatment, and decreasing distribution system leaks. Through FY 2016,
American Samoa will receive additional focused support through the national Making a Visible
Difference in Communities initiative.
In CNMI and Guam, the local utilities will implement their master plans to make improvements to
the island water and sewer systems, in compliance with federal court orders, and using EPA funding
in CNMI, and a combination of EPA and local funding in Guam.
In Guam, an EPA-managed contractor will work closely with the water utility to improve institutional
capacity, and to implement strategic preventative maintenance through asset management in order
to extend the life of infrastructure.
PI-SP26 tracks the percent of the population that has access to continuous safe drinking water.
8. The Florida 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. The EPA's South Florida Geographic
Initiative (SFGI)141 is designed to protect and restore communities and ecosystems affected by
environmental problems. SFGI efforts include activities related to the CWA Section 404 wetlands
140Read more on EPA's work in the Pacific Islands at http://www.epa.gov/region9/islands/.
141 Read more on SFGI at http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/southflorida/index.html.
Office of Water Page 70 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
protection program; the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)142; WQPP for the Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS); and the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI).
for
Support Everglades Water Quality Protection and Restoration
• Continue to track implementation of the June 2012 EPA - Florida Water Quality (reduction of total
phosphorus) Restoration Strategies Framework Agreement. This agreement requires Florida to
commit an estimated $880 million to construct water quality improvement facilities in the
Everglades with EPA oversight. EPA will be involved in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) development and review, NPDES permitting, construction
oversight, enforcement, and participation in the science committee.
• Restoration of the Everglades is the largest ongoing large-scale ecosystem restoration project in the
world that is projected to cost $13.5 billion in 2012 dollars. EPA will continue to work closely with
the Jacksonville District USAGE and the State of Florida to facilitate expedited review of 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. In addition, EPA will
continue to work with partners to expedite the Central Everglades Pilot Project.
• Support the Everglades Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) to assess the
health of the Everglades and the effectiveness of ongoing restoration and regulatory efforts. The
Everglades EMAP initiated in 1993 by EPA is critical for understanding phosphorus, mercury, sulfur,
and soil thickness conditions, including changes over time. Program data have been used by over 20
state and federal agencies, Indian tribes, agricultural interests, environmental groups, and the
National Academy of Sciences. Extensive field sampling was conducted in FY 2013 and FY 2014 at
about 120 locations. The project report for the 2014 sampling is due in FY 2016.
• Continue to work with the Seminole and Miccosukee Tribes, State of Florida, the South Florida
Water Management District and federal agencies to implement appropriate phosphorus control
programs that will attain WQS throughout the Everglades. The Seminole and the Miccosukee Tribes
both have federally approved WQS.
Implement FKNMS WQPP.143 The FKNMS and Protection Act of 1990/1992 congressionally directed EPA
and the State of Florida, in consultation with NOAA, to develop a WQPP to address water quality and
protect corals, fish, shellfish and recreational opportunities within the Sanctuary. In FY 2014, 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 (see measures SFL-SP45, SFL-SP46, SFL-47a and SFL-47b).
• Support implementation of wastewater and storm water master plans for the Florida Keys to
upgrade inadequate wastewater and storm water infrastructure by 2015 (see measure SFL-1).
• Assist with implementing the comprehensive plan for eliminating sewage discharges from boats and
other vessels.
Support the Actions of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force
142Read more on CERP at http://www.evergladesplan.org/about/about cerpbrief.aspx.
143Read more on FKNMS at see http://ocean.floridamarine.org/fknms wqpp/pages/wqpp.html.
Office of Water Page 71 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
In March 2000, the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force144 approved "The National Action Plan to Conserve Coral
Reefs" that identified reef monitoring, reduction of pollution, Marine Protected Areas development, and
other activities to protect corals reefs. In FY 2016, EPA and states will:
• Continue support and funding for the FKNMS Coral Reef Environmental Monitoring Program.
• Support implementation of the SEFCRI program to address land based sources of pollution.
Other Priority Activities for FY 2016-2017
• Continue implementation of the Monroe County Keys-wide Canal Management Master Plan.
Implementation of the plan will help to protect and restore water quality and habitat in the canals
to improve oxygen condition. Monroe County is providing $5.1 million to demonstrate weed barrier,
organic removal, culvert installation, pumping, and backfill technologies at 8 demonstration sites.
• Complete Mote Marine Laboratory special study "Assess the effects of mosquito control pesticides
on non-targeted organisms (stony coral and spiny lobsters) in the FKNMS." Data will be used by
resource management agencies to assess impacts of mosquito control pesticides on non-target
organisms and water quality within the Sanctuary.
• Complete study to determine importance of sponge-dominated hard bottom habitat in maintaining
good water quality within the Florida Keys and evaluate the large-scale extent of ecological services
provided by fully functioning hard bottom communities.
• Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) has submitted an application to Nuclear Regulatory
Commission for two new Westinghouse Advanced Passive Pressurized Water Reactors to be built in
Homestead, FL, adjacent to the existing power plant. In FY 2016, Region 4 staff will participate in the
EIS and CWA Section 404 review and the permitting process for this proposed $20 billion nuclear
station, which sits on Biscayne Bay and is adjacent the Biscayne National Park.
• Continue implementation of the South Florida Wetlands Conservation Strategy; including protecting
and restoring critical wetland habitats currently be subjected to tremendous growth and
development pressures.
• Continue active review of large wetland permit applications in South Florida, and provide written
comments to the USAGE under CWA Section 404.
Measure SFL-SP45 tracks stony coral cover.
Measure SFL-SP46 tracks the overall health and functionality of sea grass beds in the FKNMS.
Measure SFL-47a tracks Chlorophyll a and light clarity levels.
Measure SFL-47b tracks dissolved inorganic nitrogen and total phosphorus levels.
Measure SFL-1 tracks wastewater and stormwater implementation activities in the Keys.
Measure SFL-2 tracks the number of Everglades Stormwater Treatment Ares with the annual total
phosphorus outflow less than or the same as the five-year annual average.
The Columbia River Basin145 is one of the world's great river basins in terms of its land area and river
volume, as well as its environmental and cultural significance. The river is economically vital to many
Northwest industries, such as sport and commercial fishing, agriculture, hydropower, wind energy,
recreation, and tourism. Tribal people have depended on the Basin for physical, spiritual, and cultural
sustenance for centuries. Public and scientific concern about the health of the Basin ecosystem is
144Read more on the Coral Reef Task Force at http://www.coralreef.gov/about/docs.html.
145 Read more on the Columbia River Basin at http://www.epa.gov/columbiariver/.
Office of Water Page 72 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
increasing. Salmon runs have been reduced from a peak of almost 16 million fish annually to a fraction
of their original returns. There is significant habitat and wetland loss throughout the Basin. There are
several Superfund sites in the Basin (Portland Harbor, Hanford, Coeur d'Alene River Basin and Lake
Roosevelt) and there are growing concerns about toxic contamination in fish, aquatic life, and wildlife.
The Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working Group will continue to focus on the following priority
areas:
• Sustainable Purchasing and Green Chemistry: Develop guidance for governmental agencies in the
basin to establish and implement low toxicity purchasing guidelines (chaired by Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality),
• Chemicals of Emerging Concern: Implement research to characterize the effects to aquatic biota
from chemicals of emerging concern (chaired by USGS).
• Pesticide Stewardship Partnership: Expand the Pesticide Stewardship Partnership type programs to
other areas in the Columbia River Basin (chaired by Salmon Safe).
• Stormwater: Expand stormwater technical assistance programs to small and medium businesses
(chaired by Washington Department of Ecology).
• Resource Needs and Policy Reform: Educate Columbia Basin stakeholders on the need for
sustainable funding to develop a coordinated toxics monitoring and reduction program and the
need to support EPA's principles for chemical management reform (chaired by Columbia River Inter-
Tribal Fish Commission and Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership)
Working with partners, including the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership and the States of Washington
and Oregon, EPA tracks several program measures:
• Measure CR-SP53. Clean up acres of known highly contaminated sediments in the Portland Harbor
and other sites in the Lower Columbia River; and
• Measure CR-SP54. Demonstrate a reduction in mean concentration of certain contaminants of
concern found in water and fish tissue where baseline data is available.
The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary (Bay Delta)146 is the largest estuary on the west coast of North
America. In 2009, EPA joined with other federal agencies in redoubling our collective efforts toward
restoring beneficial uses of the Bay Delta ecosystem and advancing the design of infrastructure needed
to secure California's water supplies. In August 2012, EPA released the Bay Delta Action Plan147 that
identifies seven priority actions for Region 9 to take in collaboration with interagency partners and
NGOs. Some of the most tangible improvements in water quality and ecosystem functions are achieved
through the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund148.
146 Read more on the Bay Delta at http://www2.epa. gov/sfbav-delta.
147 Read more on the Bay Delta Action Plan at http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta/bav-delta-action-plan.
148 Read more on the Bay Area Water Projects at http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta/bav-area-water-projects.
Office of Water Page 73 of 107
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
'•'"
• Advancing the seven point Bay Delta Action Plan, including contributing to the update of the State's
Water Quality Control Plan for the Delta and lower San Joaquin River, establishing a Regional
Monitoring Program for the Delta, implementing existing TMDLs across the Bay Delta watershed,
drafting site-specific selenium criteria to protect aquatic and terrestrial species, and partnering with
EPA ORD and USGS to complete field studies on potential treatment technologies for
methylmercury in wetlands. EPA will collaborate with the Bay Conservation and Development
Commission (BCDC) per the EPA's Climate Ready Estuaries Program149, to identify habitats and
infrastructure that are vulnerable to climate change and sea level rise, and formulate new policies
for BCDS's Bay Plan to address these vulnerabilities.
• Supporting activities that predict, mitigate, and adapt to the effects of climate change on the Bay-
Delta watershed consistent with the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning150
prepared by EPA in partnership with the California Department of Water Resources, USAGE, and the
Resources Legacy Fund.
• Advancing the ongoing implementation of the San Francisco Estuary Partnership's CCMP151 by
reducing adverse effects of urban/suburban runoff on water quality - through watershed planning,
implementation of TMDLs, and the use of LID and green infrastructure152.
• Continuing to administer the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund153.
D.
149 Read more at http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/planning/climate change/estuary.shtml.
150 Read the Handbook at http://www.water.ca.gov/climatechange/CCHandbook.cfm.
151 Read the CCMP at http://sfep.sfei.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/2007-CCMP.pdf.
152 Read more on LID at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/green/.
153 Read more on Bay Area water projects at http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta/bav-area-water-projects.
Office of Water Page 74 of 107
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
FY2015
ACS Codes
FY 2016 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2016
Budget
Target
FY 2016 Planning
Target
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant
Measure); KPI (Key Performance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Long Term Budget Measure), and I (Indicator Measure). FY 2015
Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2015 Congressional Justification. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY 2014-
2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitment (or
target/commitment at 0).
Goal 2 Protecting America's Waters
Objective 2.1 Protect Hunan Health
Sub-objective 2.1.1 Water Safe to Drink
SDW-211
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.
BUD
SG
ARRA
92%
92%
SDW-
SP1.N11
Percent of community water systems that meet all applicable health-based
standards through approaches that include effective treatment and source water
protection.
SP
BUD, SG
90%
90%
SDW-SP2
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.
BUD
KPI
95%
95%
SDW-
SP3.N11
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.
SP
BUD
KPI
87%
87%
75
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
SDW-20
SDW-SP4a
SDW-SP4b
SDW-18.N11
SDW-Ola
SDW-Olb
SDW-04
SDW-05
Percent of 'person months' (i.e. all persons served by community water systems
times 12 months) during which community water systems in Indian country
provide 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 American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to safe
drinking water in coordination with other federal agencies.
Percent of community water systems (CWSs) that have undergone a sanitary
survey within the past three years (five years for outstanding performers or
those ground water systems approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log
treatment of viruses).
Number of tribal community water systems (CWSs) that have undergone a
sanitary survey within the past three years (five years for outstanding
performers or those ground water systems approved to provide 4-log treatment
ofviruses).
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, (cumulative)
BUD
SG
SP
BUD
BUD
SG
BUD
ARRA
ARRA
LT
LT
79%
89%
90%
49.0%
59.0%
119,000
79%
850
89%
9,000
76
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
SDW-07
SDW-08
SDW-11
SDW-15
SDW-17
SDW-19a
SDW-19b
SDW-21
Percent of Classes I, II and Class III salt solution mining wells that have lost
mechanical integrity and are returned to compliance within 180 days thereby
reducing the potential to endanger underground sources of drinking water.
Number of Class V motor vehicle waste disposal wells (MVWDW) and large
capacity cesspools (LCC) that are closed or permitted (cumulative).
Percent of DWSRF projects awarded to small PWS serving <500, 501-3,300, and
3,301-10,000 consumers.
Number and percent of small CWS and NTNCWS (<500, 501-3,300, 3,301-
10,000) with repeat health based Nitrate/ Nitrite, Stage 1 D/DBP, SWTR and TCR
violations.
Number and percent of schools and childcare centers that meet all health-based
drinking water standards.
Volume of CO 2 sequestered through injection as defined by the UIC Final Rule.
Number of permit decisions during the reporting period that result in C02
sequestered through injection as defined by the UIC Final Rule.
Number of drinking water and wastewater utilities and local, state, and federal
officials receiving training and technical assistance to enhance emergency
preparedness and resiliency to reduce risk from all hazards including those
attributed to climate change impacts.
BUD
SG
BUD
I
I
I
I
I
85%
25,225
85%
26,751
Indicator
Indicator
Indicator
Indicator
Indicator
1,000
Sub-objective 2.1.2 Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
77
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
FS-SP6.N11
FS-la
FS-lb
Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in blood above the
level of concern.
Percent of river miles where fish tissue were 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) (Report every two years)
Percent of lake acres where fish tissue were 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) (Report every two years)
SP
BUD
I
I
2.3%
2.3%
Indicator
Indicator
Sub-objective 2.1.3 Water Safe for Swimming
78
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
SS-SP9.N11
SS-1
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.
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.
SP
SG
SG
95.0%
790(92%)
98%
Objective 2.2 Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
Sub-objective 2.2.1 Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
WQ-
SP10.N11
Number of waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining water quality
standards where standards are now fully attained, (cumulative)
SP
KPI, BUD
SG, ARRA
4,166
4,166
79
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-SP11
Remove the specific causes of waterbody impairment identified by states in
2002. (cumulative)
BUD
13,288
13,228
WQ-
SP12.N11
Improve water quality conditions in impaired watersheds nationwide using the
watershed approach, (cumulative)
SP
BUD
484
484
SP13 Nil
Ensure that the condition of the Nation's waters does not degrade (i.e., there is
no statistically significant increase in the percent of waters rated "poor" and no
statistically significant decrease in the waters rated "good").
SP
LT
No degradation in
lakes
WQ-
SP14a.Nll
Improve water quality in Indian country at baseline 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)
SPBUD
LT
40
SP14b.Nll
Identify monitoring stations on tribal lands that are showing no degradation in
water quality (meaning the waters are meeting tribal water quality objectives).
(cumulative)
SP
I
Indicator
WQ-24.N11
Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to basic
sanitation in coordination with other federal agencies (cumulative).
SP
BUD
LT
82,500
80
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-Ola
Number of numeric water quality standards adopted for total nitrogen or total
phosphorus for all waters within the State or Territory for each of the following
waterbody types: lakes/reservoirs, rivers/streams, and estuaries.
SG
75
WQ-Old
Number of numeric water quality standards planned to be adopted within 3
years for total nitrogen and total phosphorus for all waters within the state or
territory for each of the following waterbody types: lakes/reservoirs,
rivers/streams, and estuaries, based on a full set of performance milestone
information supplied annually by states and territories (cumulative, out of a
universe of 280).
WQ-26
Number of states and territories implementing nutrient reduction strategies by
(1) setting priorities on a watershed or state-wide basis, (2) establishing
nutrient reduction targets, and (3) continuing to make progress (and provide
performance milestone information to EPA) on adoption of numeric nutrient
criteria for at least one class of waters by no later than 2 016. (cumulative)
SG
Deleted
Number of tribes that have water quality standards approved by EPA.
WQ-02 (cumulative)
44
81
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-03a
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.
BUD
SG
73.2
41(73.2%)
WQ-03b
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.
12
Percentage of submissions of new or revised water quality standards from states
WQ-04a and territories that are approved by EPA.
Indicator
WQ-06a
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, (cumulative)
240
WQ-06b
Number of tribes that are providing water quality data in a format accessible for
storage in EPA's data system, (cumulative)
Deleted
82
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-09a
Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of nitrogen from nonpoint sources
to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
BUD
9.1
9.1
Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of phosphorus from nonpoint
WQ-09b sources to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
BUD
4.5
4.5
Estimated annual reduction in million tons of sediment from nonpoint sources
WQ-09c to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
BUD
1.2
1.2
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)
BUD
SG
LT
644
WQ-11
Number, and national percent, of follow-up actions that are completed by
assessed NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) programs.
(cumulative)
Indicator
WQ-12a
Percent of non-tribal facilities covered by NPDES permits that are considered
current.
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and report results in both % and
#.]
KPI
90%
Percent of tribal facilities covered by NPDES permits that are considered
current.
WQ-12 b [Measure will still set targets and commitments and report results in both % and
#.]
90%
83
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-13a
Number of MS-4s covered under either an individual or general permit.
Indicator
Number of facilities covered under either an individual or general industrial
WQ-13b storm water permit.
Indicator
Number of sites covered under either an individual or general construction
WQ-13c storm water site permit.
Indicator
WQ-13d
Number of facilities covered under either an individual or general CAFO permit.
Indicator
WQ-14a
Number, and national percent, of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) that are
discharging to POTWs with Pretreatment Programs that have control
mechanisms in place that implement applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements.
98%(20,700)
WQ-14b
Number, and national percent, of Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs) that are
discharging to POTWs without Pretreatment Programs that have control
mechanisms in place that implement applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements.
Indicator
Fund utilization rate [cumulative loan agreement dollars to the cumulative funds
WQ-17 available for projects] for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
BUD
ARRA
95.0%
95.0%
84
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-19a
Number of high priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
BUD, SG
80%
488
Number of high priority state and EPA (including tribal) NPDES permits that are
WQ-19b issued in the fiscal year.
BUD
80%
526
WQ-22a
Number of regions that have completed the development of a Healthy
Watersheds Initiative (HWI) Strategy and have reached an agreement with at
least one state to implement its portion of the region's HWI Strategy.
Deleted
Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking water supply
WQ-2 3 and wastewater disposal.
BUD
93.0%
93.0%
Number of urban water projects initiated addressing water quality issues in the
WQ-25a community.
BUD
49
49
WQ-25b
Number of urban water projects completed addressing water quality issues in
the community, (cumulative)
BUD
78
78
WQ-2 7
Extent of priority areas identified by each state that are addressed by EPA-
approved TMDLs or alternative restoration approaches for impaired waters that
will achieve water quality standards. These areas may also include protection
approaches for unimpaired waters to maintain water quality standards.
BUD
8%
8%
85
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WQ-28
State-wide extent of activities leading to completed TMDLs or alternative
restoration approaches for impaired waters, or protection approaches for
unimpaired waters.
Indicator
WQ-29
Number of states protecting or improving water quality conditions, as
demonstrated by:
• On average, water quality is improving or at least not degrading (there is no
statistically significant decrease in mean water quality);
• The percentage of waters in good condition is increasing or remaining
constant;
• The percentage of waters in poor condition is decreasing or remaining
constant.
Indicator
WQ-30
Number of WaterSense partners working to improve water use efficiency.
Indicator
Number of water and wastewater utilities that use the EnergyStar Portfolio
WQ-31 Manager to manage energy.
Indicator
Number of water and wastewater utilities that have registered to use the
WQ-32 Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool (GREAT).
Indicator
WQ-33
Number of water State Revolving Loan Fund programs with project priority lists
that give additional credit to projects that implement a utility climate change
resilience plan.
Indicator
Number of projects funded by State Water Revolving Loan Fund Programs that
WQ-34 implement recommendations of a climate preparedness and resilience plan
adopted by a water utility.
Indicator
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
Sub-objective 2.2.2 Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
CO-
SP22.N11
CO-
SP20.N11
CO-02
CO-04
CO-06
CO-432.N11
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.
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).
Total coastal and non-coastal statutory square miles protected from vessel
sewage by "no discharge zone(s)." (cumulative)
Dollar value of "primary" leveraged resources (cash or in-kind) obtained by the
NEP Directors and/or staff in millions of dollars rounded to the nearest tenth of
a percent.
Number of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that are monitored in
the reporting year.
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).
SP
BUD
SPBUD
I
I
I
SP
BUD
LT
95%
100,000
Deleted
95%
Indicator
Indicator
Indicator
100,000
Sub-objective 2.2.3 Increase Wetlands
WT-SP22
WT-01
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. ("No net loss" of wetlands is based on requirements for
mitigation in CWA 404 permits and not the actual mitigation attained.)
Number of acres restored and improved, under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great
waterbody programs (cumulative).
BUD
BUD
No net loss
240,000
No Net Loss
240,000
87
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
WT-02a
WT-03
Number of states/tribes that have substantially built or increased capacity in
wetland regulation, monitoring and assessment, water quality standards, and/or
restoration and protection. (Annual)
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 the current fiscal year documents requirements for greater
environmental protection* than originally proposed.
I
I
Indicator
Indicator
Sub-objective 2.2.4 The Great Lakes
GL-SP31
GL-05
GL-07
GL-09
GL-17
Areas of Concern where all management actions necessary for delisting have
been implemented (cumulative).
Area of Concern Beneficial Use Impairments removed (cumulative).
Number GLRI-funded Great Lakes rapid responses or exercises conducted.
Number of aquatic/terrestrial acres controlled by GLRI-funded projects
(cumulative).
Projected phosphorus reductions from GLRI-funded projects in targeted
watersheds (cumulative, measured in pounds).
SP
BUD
BUD
BUD
BUD
BUD
9
65
8
104,500
310,000
9
65
8
104,500
310,000
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
GL-18
GL-19
GL-20
GL-21
GL-22
Projected volume of untreated urban runoff captured or treated by GLRI -funded
projects (cumulative, measured in millions of gallons).
Number of miles of Great Lakes tributaries reopened by GLRI-funded projects
(cumulative).
Number of miles of Great Lakes shoreline and riparian corridors protected,
restored, and enhanced by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
Number of acres of Great Lakes coastal wetlands protected, restored, and
enhanced by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
Number of acres of other habitats in the Great Lakes basin protected, restored,
and enhanced by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
BUD
BUD
BUD
BUD
BUD
70
2,500
100
15,000
147,000
70
2,500
100
15,000
147,000
Sub-objective 2.2.5 The Chesapeake Bay
CB-05.N14
CB-SP35
Percent attainment of water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, water
clarity/ underwater grasses, and chlorophyll a in Chesapeake Bay and tidal
tributaries.
Percent of goal achieved for implementing nitrogen pollution reduction actions
to achieve the final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3
watershed model.
SP
BUD
45.0%
Long Term
52.5%
89
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
CB-SP36
CB-SP37
Percent of goal achieved for implementing phosphorus pollution reduction
actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3
watershed model.
Percent of goal achieved for implementing sediment pollution reduction actions
to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed
model.
BUD
BUD
45.0%
45.0%
52.5%
52.5%
Sub-objective 2.2.6 The Gulf of Mexico
GM-SP38
GM-01
GM-SP39
GM-
SP40.N11
GM-02
Restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality standards in impaired
segments in 13 priority areas, (cumulative starting in FY 07)
Improve and/or restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality
standards in watersheds throughout the five Gulf States and the Mississippi
River Basin.
Protect, enhance, or restore coastal and upland habitats within the Gulf of
Mexico watershed.
Promote and support environmental education and outreach to the inhabitants
of the Gulf of Mexico watershed.
BUD
BUD
BUD
SP
SP
2
30,800
Deleted
2
15
Deleted
2500
90
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
GM-03
Support the assessment, development and implementation of programs,
projects and tools which strengthen community resilience.
SP
5
Sub-objective 2.2.7 Long Island Sound
LI-SP41
LI-SP42.N11
LI-SP43
LI-SP44
Percent of goal achieved in reducing trade-equalized (TE) point source nitrogen
discharges to Long Island Sound from the 1999 baseline of 59,146 TE Ibs/day.
Reduce the size (square miles) of observed hypoxia (Dissolved Oxygen <3mg/i)
in Long Island Sound.
Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of
2,975 acres.
Reopen miles of river and stream corridors to diadromous fish passage from the
2010 baseline of 177 river miles by removal of dams and barriers or by
installation of bypass structures.
BUD
SP
BUD
BUD
95.0%
43
88
95.0%
Long Term
43
88
Sub-objective 2.2.8 The Puget Sound Basin
PS-SP49.N11
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)
SP
BUD
5,340
5,340
91
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
PS-SP51
Protect or restore acres or shoreline miles of aquatic habitats including:
estuaries, floodplains, marine and freshwater shorelines, riparian areas, stream
habitats and associated wetlands, (cumulative starting in FY06)
BUD
45,500
45,500
Sub-objective 2.2.9 U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
MB-SP23
MB-
SP24.N11
MB-
SP25.N11
Loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removed (cumulative million
pounds/year) from the U.S.-Mexico Border area since 2003.
Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the U.S.-Mexico
border area since 2003.
Number of additional homes provided adequate waste water sanitation in the
U.S.-Mexico border area since 2003.
BUD
SP
BUD
SP
BUD
170.3
500
53,000
150
500
45,000
Sub-objective 2.2.10 The Pacific Island Territories
PI-SP26
Percent of population in the U.S. Pacific Island Territories served by community
water systems that has access to continuous drinking water meeting all
applicable health-based drinking water standards, measured on a four quarter
rolling average basis.
BUD
80%
85%
Sub-objective 2.2.11 The South Florida Ecosystem
SFL-SP45
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).
I
Indicator
92
-------
APPENDIX A-National Targets
SFL-SP46
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.
Indicator
SFL-SP47a
At least seventy five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and
coastal waters of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary will maintain
Chlorophyll a (CHLA) levels at less than or equal to 0.35 ug 1-1 and light clarity
(Kd)) levels at less than or equal to 0.20 m-1.
BUD
75%
75%
SFL-SP47b
At least seventy five percent of the monitored stations in the near shore and
coastal waters of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary will maintain
dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) levels at less than or equal to 0.75 uM and
total phosphorus (TP) levels at less than or equal to .25 uM .
BUD
75%
75%
SFL-1
Increase percentage of sewage treatment facilities and onsite sewage treatment
and disposal systems receiving advanced wastewater treatment or best
available technology as recorded by EDU in Florida Keys two percent (1500
EDUs) annually.
Indicator
SFL-2
The number of Everglades Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) with the annual
total phosphorus (TP) outflow less than or the same as the five-year annual
average TP outflow, working towards the long-term goal of meeting the 10 parts
per billion annual geometric mean.
BUD
Sub-objective 2.2.12 The Columbia River Basin
CR-SP53
Clean up acres of known contaminated sediments, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
88
CR-SP54
Demonstrate a reduction in mean concentration of certain contaminants of
concern found in water and fish tissue, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
Indicator
93
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
EXPLANATION OF CHANGES BETWEEN FY 2014-2015 AND FY 2016-2017
Office of Water
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
General
Information was added to describe the early
input process form states and tribes.
Reason for Change
The updated language takes into account early
input and necessary updates for FY 2016-2017.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Pages 3-4
National
Areas of
Focus
The Protecting Populations at Risk Area of
Focus was updated to include a new activity in
the Environmental Justice (EJ) section on taking
EJ into consideration when EPA issues permits
under the NPDES and UIC programs.
As part of the Agency's EJ in Permitting pilot,
EPA will attempt to test, evaluate, and refine
draft tools to enhance consideration of EJ.
Page 6
The Providing Safe and Sustainable Water
Resources and Infrastucture Area of Focus was
updated to include support for the Build
America Initiative and implementation of the
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
Act (WIFIA).
The activities were highlighted to enhance the
Agency's focus on supporting sustainable
water infrastructure.
Page 11
A new topic was included under the Assuring
High Quality and Accessible Water Information
Area of Focus on the Drinking Water Mapping
Application for Protecting Source Water
(DWMAPS)
Recent emergencies and large scale-
contamination events highlighted the need to
improve awareness of risks to drinking water.
Page 16
94
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
EPA added and updated a number of activities
to the Climate Change section in the Cross-
Cutting Themes area including: strengthening
collaboration across EPA's Offices and among
its Federal partners; expanding efforts to
support place-based assessments of water
resource vulnerability to climate change; and
expanding and strengthening efforts to reduce
the release of greenhouse gases associated with
water management
Program-
Specific
Guidance
Reason for Change
In 2016-2017, the Agency is building on
climate policy initiatives that were developed
in FY 2014 and FY 2015.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Pages 22-23
The Water Safe to Drink section of the Guidance
includes two new statements on the Agency's
intent to develop a final rule in 2017 to support
the collection of drinking water contaminant
occurrence data under the next cycle of the
Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule
(UCMR 4), and propose a rule in 2016 that
makes conforming changes to existing
regulations on the Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act (RLDWA)
Proposed UCMR 4 rule was published in 2015.
Page 28
The guidance includes an extensive discussion
on the goals, activities, and benefits of the CWA
303(d) and TMDL Program Vision. This
includes a new approach to tracking water
quality progress using the National
Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDP/us) to
describe where states have developed TMDLs,
The 303(d) Program Vision reflects the
successful collaboration among States and
EPA, which began in August2011.
Pages 45-46
95
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
alternative restoration and protection
approaches
Reason for Change
Location of New/Modified
Information
EPA is developing a planned rulemaking in
2015 to provide opportunities for tribes to
more fully engage in the CWA Impaired Water
Listing and TMDL Program.
Existing regulations under CWA Section 518
do not explicitly address how tribes obtain
Treatment in the Same Manner as a State
(TAS) for the 303(d) Program.
Page 46
Text is added to the NPDES Permit section on
EPA's intent to conduct a strategic planning
effort aimed at meeting 21st century water
quality challenges for the permitting program.
The purpose of the effort is to strengthen
partnerships and clarify roles between
headquarters, EPA regions, and states, as well
as between the WQS, TMDL, and NPDES
programs.
Page 47
New paragraph added on the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program's efforts in
2016-2017 to promote the implementation of
the CWSRF Water Resources Reform and
Development Act (WRRDA - 2014)
amendments.
A key provision of WRRDA requires certain
CWSRF assistance recipients to evaluate the
cost and effectiveness of key components for
carrying out the proposed project or activity
and maximize the potential for efficient water
use, reuse, recapture, and conservation,.
Page 52
New paragraph added on new approach to
track water quality progress using the National
Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDP/us) to
calculate watershed areas where water quality
standards are being attained, and
implementation of protection activities are
occurring.
This approach will consistently measure
progress at the local scale, while allowing for
tighter integration with data and assessments
at the state and national scale.
Pages 53-54
96
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
Changes to Coastal and Ocean Water Activities
for FY 2016-2017 include a new title and
reporting cycle for the National Coastal
Condition Report, new statements on ocean and
coastal acidification, pollution from vessels, and
ocean debris. Agency is also seeking comment
on existing suite of measures that track ocean
protection and restoration progress
Reason for Change
Changes added to update Agency's activities
for protection oceans and coastal waters.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Pages 55-56
Under the Increase Wetlands section, Agency is
seeking comment on a suite of exiting measures
that track wetlands protection and restoration
progress.
Existing measures may not fully capture the
progress and achievements being made.
Page 60
Update in activities to the section on protecting
the Great Lakes including, increasing
knowledge about contaminants in Great Lakes
fish and wildlife, preventing new invasive
species, reducing nutrient loads, protecting
habitats to sustain populations of native
species, ensuring climate resilience of GLRI-
funded projects, and educating the next
generation on the Great Lakes ecosystem.
Guidance is updated to reflect the FY2015-
FY2019 Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
Action Plan.
Pages 60-62
Section on the Chesapeake Bay has been
updated to include the new Chesapeake Bay
Watershed Agreement
Agreement was signed by EPA and its
Chesapeake Bay partners on June 14, 2014.
Pages 62-63
97
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
EPA added new updates to the section on the
Gulf of Mexico including addressing nutrient
loadings that contribute to hypoxic conditions,
enhancing community resilience to storm risk
and sea-level rise, and environmental
education
Reason for Change
Updated activities need to reflect changes in
performance measures.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Pages 65-66
EPA made updates to the section on protecting
the Puget Sound that include issues to be
addressed under the Puget Sound Action
Agenda.
The 2014/2015 Puget Sound Action Agenda
was adopted on May 30, 2014 and serves as
the Comprehensive Conservation
Management Plan (CCMP) approved under
the National Estuary Program.
Pages 67-68
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Measure modified: WQ-la. Number of numeric
water quality standards adopted for total nitrogen
or total phosphorus for all waters within the State
or Territory for each of the following waterbody
types: lakes/reservoirs, rivers/streams, and
estuaries.
Measure added: WQ-ld: Number of numeric
water quality standards planned to be adopted
within 3 years for total nitrogen and total
phosphorus for all waters within the state or
territory for each of the following waterbody
types: lakes/reservoirs, rivers/streams, and
estuaries, based on a full set of performance
milestone information supplied annually by states
This measure was modified to encourage
states to adopt numeric nitrogen and
phosphorus criteria. While WQ-la and WQ-ld
are closely related, WQ-la counts number of
numeric WQS actually adopted while WQ-ld
counts planned criteria.
Appendix A
98
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
and territories (cumulative, out of a universe of
280).
Reason for Change
Location of New/Modified
Information
Measure deleted: WQ-26. Number of states and
territories implementing nutrient reduction
strategies by (1) setting priorities on a watershed
or state-wide basis, (2) establishing nutrient
reduction targets, and (3) continuing to make
progress (and provide performance milestone
information to EPA) on adoption of numeric
nutrient criteria for at least one class of waters by
no later than 2016. (cumulative)
EPA deleted measure WQ-26. As EPA
continues to place a high priority on states
adopting numeric WQS for total nitrogen and
total phosphorus that apply to all waters, the
component of WQ-26 that tracked NNC
progress will now be tracked under water
quality criteria measure WQ-Ol(d). EPA
continues to encourage states to set priorities
on a watershed or statewide basis, establish
nutrient reduction targets, reduce point and
nonpoint source nutrient loads, inform the
public, provide accountability, and adopt
numeric nutrient criteria (NNC).
Appendix A
Measure deleted: WQ-6b. Number of tribes that
are providing water quality data in a format
accessible for storage in EPA's data system.
(cumulative)
EPA deleted this measure because the Agency
believes that it is of limited use in providing a
clear picture of the current status of tribes
uploading data. EPA believe it can get better
information from annually querying STORET.
Appendix A
Measure modified: WQ-14a. Number, and
national percent, of Significant Industrial Users
(SIUs) that are discharging to POTWs with
Pretreatment Programs that have control
EPA is proposing to modify this measure from
a target to an indicator measure. A change to
Indicator status would allow for reporting of
end of year numbers that could be used for
tracking purposes, without having to commit
Appendix A
99
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
mechanisms in place that implement applicable
pretreatment standards and requirements.
Reason for Change
to a number that is out of the control of the
permitting authority that may only reflect a
snapshot at any given time.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Measure deleted: WQ-22a. Number of regions
that have completed the development of a Healthy
Watersheds Initiative (HWI) Strategy and have
reached an agreement with at least one state to
implement its portion of the region's HWI
Strategy.
EPA proposes deleting this measure since
many Regions have completed the
development of a Healthy Watershed
Initiative strategy. As the Healthy Watershed
Initiative progresses EPA will consider
adopting a different, more targeted measure.
Appendix A
Measure added: WQ-29. Number of states
protecting or improving water quality conditions,
as demonstrated by state-scale statistical surveys:
• On average, water quality is improving or at least
not degrading (there is no statistically significant
decrease in mean water quality);
• The percentage of waters in good condition is
increasing or remaining constant; and,
• The percentage of waters in poor condition is
decreasing or remaining constant.
States have been working on state-wide
statistical surveys either independently or in
conjunction with national surveys. This
measure will use the state survey data to
establish a baseline for state water quality and
then track the number of states
demonstrating incremental improvements in
water quality.
Appendix A
Measure added: WQ-30. Number of WaterSense
partners working to improve water use efficiency.
EPA is proposing program measures related
to progress of water programs in reducing the
release of greenhouse gases and sequestering
carbon. Added measure will an indicator.
Appendix A
100
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
Measure added: WQ-31. Number of water and
wastewater utilities that use the EnergyStar
Portfolio Manager to manage energy.
Reason for Change
EPA is proposing program measures related
to progress of water programs in reducing the
release of greenhouse gases and sequestering
carbon. Added measure will an indicator
Location of New/Modified
Information
Appendix A
Measure added: WQ-32. Number of water and
wastewater utilities that have registered to use the
Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness
Tool (GREAT).
EPA is proposing program measures related
to progress of water programs in adopting to
changing climate. Added measure will an
indicator
Appendix A
Measure added: WQ-33. Number of water State
Revolving Loan Fund programs with project
priority lists that give additional credit to projects
that implement a utility climate change resilience
plan.
EPA is proposing program measures related
to progress of water programs in adopting to
changing climate. Added measure will an
indicator
Appendix A
Measure deleted: GM-SP-38. Restore water and
habitat quality to meet water quality standards in
impaired segments in 13 priority areas.
(cumulative starting in FY 07)
Measure replaced by GM-01
Appendix A
Measure added. GM-01. Improve and/or restore
water and habitat quality to meet water quality
standards in watersheds throughout the five Gulf
States and the Mississippi River Basin.
The replacement performance measure
language better reflects how the Gulf of
Mexico Program Office implements projects
and programs which improve water and
habitat quality throughout the Gulf of Mexico
watershed (and this includes the entire
Mississippi River watershed.)
Appendix A
101
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
Measure modified: GM-SP39. Protect, enhance,
or restore coastal and upland habitats within the
Gulf of Mexico watershed.
Reason for Change
The performance measure is very similar to
what previously existed. However, the words
are rearranged because competitively funding
projects and programs which "protect and/or
enhance" habitats is more feasible than
funding projects which "restore" habitats.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Appendix A
Measure deleted: GM-SP40.N11. 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.
Based on a recent OIG report that found that
the hypoxia measure did not realistically
reflect what the Gulf of Mexico Program Office
was set up to achieve, EPA has proposed to
delete the measure.
Appendix A
Measure added: GM-02. Promote and support
environmental education and outreach to the
inhabitants of the Gulf of Mexico watershed.
Environmental education is a key strategic
objective for the Gulf program. EPA proposes
to add this measure to track progress in this
area.
Appendix A
Measure added: GM-03. Support the assessment,
development and implementation of programs,
projects and tools which strengthen community
resilience.
This is a new performance measure; however,
it is not a new activity. The Gulf of Mexico
Program Office is very active with respect to
coastal resilience awareness and has
competitively funded numerous projects
which have strengthened coastal and
nearshore communities around the Gulf
region.
Appendix A
102
-------
APPENDIX B-Explanation of Changes Between FY 2014-2015 and FY 2016-2017
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
Measure modified: PS-SP51. Protect or restore
acres or shoreline miles of aquatic habitats
including: estuaries, floodplains, marine and
freshwater shorelines, riparian areas, stream
habitats and associated wetlands, (cumulative
starting in FY06)
Reason for Change
The revision to this measure language will
ensure compatibility (in terms of scope and
categorical definition) with the Puget Sound
programs' contribution to National Estuary
Program (NEP) measure CO- 4.3.2. Nil. This
revision does not change previous year's
results. It also does not change how the
measure is calculated.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Appendix A
Contact
Information
Contacts by Sub-objective
Adding a list of contacts by Sub-objective
Appendix B
103
-------
APPENDIX C-Key Contacts
KEY CONTACTS APPENDIX
Contact Name Subject Area Phone Email
Sandy Evalenko
Alice Walker
Felicia Wright
Jeff Peterson
Jeff Lape
Tracy Miller
Eric Bissonette
Travis Cummings
John Wathen
Jackie Clark
Kristie Moore
Jackie Clark
Bernice Smith
Mindy Eisenberg
Mike Russ
Jennie Gundersen
Lael Butler
Joseph Salata
Children's Health
Environmental
Justice
Tribes
Climate Change
Innovative
Technology
Grants Management
Water Safe to Drink
Fish and Shellfish
Safe to Eat
Water Safe for
Swimming
Improve Water
Quality on a
Watershed Basis
Improve Coastal and
Ocean Waters
Increase Wetlands
Great Lakes
Chesapeake Bay
Gulf of Mexico
Long Island Sound
(202)564-0264
(202)529-7534
(202)566-1186
(202)564-3745
(202)566-0480
(202)564-0783
(202)564-2147
(202)564-9592
(202)566-0367
(202)564-6582
(202)566-1616
(202)564-6582
(202)566-1244
(202)566-1209
(312)886-4013
(410)267-5711
(228)688-1576
(203)977-1541
evaleko.sandy@epa.gov
walke r . alice @ ep a. go v
wright felicia@epa. gov
perterson.jeff@epa.gov
lape.jeff@epa.gov
miller.tracey@epa.gov
Bissonette.eric@epa.gov
cummings.travis@epa.gov
wathen.john@epa.gov
dark, j ackie @epa. gov
moore.kristie@epa.gov
dark, j ackie @epa. gov
smith.bernicel@epa.gov
eisenberg.mindy@epa.gov
russ.michael@epa.gov
gundersen.jennifer@epa.gov
butler.lael@epa.gov
salata.joseph@epa.gov
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State, Interstate, and Tribal Grant Recipients
Contact Name Subject Area Phone Email
Chris Castner
Robin Danesi
John McCarroll
Steve Blackburn
MaryLou Soscia
Paul Amato
The Puget Sound
U.S.-Mexico Border
Pacific Island
Territories
South Florida
Ecosystem
Columbia River
Basin
San Francisco Bay
Delta Estuary
(206)553-6517
(202)564-1846
(415)972-3774
(404) 562-9397
(503)326-5873
(415)972-3847
castne r . chr is @ ep a. gov
danesi.robin@epa.gov
mccarroll.john@epa.gov
blackbur n. steve n@ ep a. gov
soscia.marylou@epa.gov
amato.paul@epa.gov
This appendix, along with the specific text found in Section III.C.I.a, provide guidance for state,
interstate, and tribal grant recipients when implementing water pollution control programs under
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Together, Section III.C.I, and Appendix D make up the CWA
Section 106 grant guidance.
FY 2016 Nutrient Management Activities: In FY 2016, EPA requested additional funds to states and
tribes to support their nutrient reduction efforts consistent with EPA Office of Water guidance issued in
March 2011154. These Section 106 nutrient reduction activities will work in conjunction with those being
carried out by states and tribes using Section 319 and U.S. Department of Agriculture funding and focus
154 The eight key principles are identified in the March 16, 2011, memorandum "Working in Partnership with States
to Address Phosphorus and Nitrogen Pollution through the Use of a Framework for State Nutrient Reductions
(Framework)"
105
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State, Interstate, and Tribal Grant Recipients
on key principles that have guided the agency technical assistance and collaboration with the states. EPA
will work with states and tribes as they develop work plans to ensure these additional funds are used for
tasks consistent with the Framework and support the implementation of nutrient reduction activities.
Base Program Measures: CWA Section 106 funding supports many of the strategic targets and goals
outlined in the National Water Program Guidance. These measures include:
WQ-SP10.N11
WQ-SP11
WQ-SP12.N11
WQ-SP13
WQ-la
WQ-26
WQ-3a
WQ-27
WQ-10
WQ-12a
WQ-13a, b, c, d
WQ-14a
WQ-19a
SS-1
Measures specific to tribal programs are found in Section
Guidance.
I.A.I, of this National Water Program
Guidance for Core Programs: Guidance for core programs funded through grants for water pollution
control programs under CWA Section 106 is provided in specific text in Section III.C.l., Improve Water
Quality on a Watershed Basis.
Other programs in the NWPG that can utilize CWA Section 106 Funds: State, interstate, and tribal
agencies can use CWA Section 106 grants to carry out a wide range of water quality planning and
management activities. Agencies have the flexibility to allocate funds toward priority activities. Other
activities that may be funded with CWA Section 106 funds include:
Source Water (Surface Water and Ground Water): EPA regions, states, and tribes are reminded that
CWA Section 106 grant funds are an essential funding source for source water protection activities. The
Agency recommends that states and tribes continue to direct a portion of their CWA Section 106
funding for source water protection and wellhead protection actions that protect both ground water
and surface water used for drinking water. EPA regions, states, and tribes that administer EPA-approved
WQS programs should ensure that there are protective water quality standards in place, and being
attained, for each waterbody being used as a public water supply. Also, EPA encourages states and
tribes to allocate a reasonable share of water quality monitoring resources to assess attainment of the
public water supply use, and consider using water quality or compliance monitoring data collected by
public water systems in assessing water quality and determining impairment. EPA regions, states, and
tribes should consider placing a high priority on (a) waterbodies where state, tribal, or local source
water assessments have identified highly threatening sources of contamination that are subject to CWA
and (b) the development and implementation of TMDLs to address impairments of the public water
supply use. In particular, EPA regions and states should consider the hydrologic relationship between
point source dischargers and drinking water intakes in setting permit requirements and inspection and
enforcement priorities. EPA also encourages state programs to consider using their allocation to
leverage the resources of Source Water Collaborative members and allies, found on:
http://www.sourcewatercollaborative.org/. In addition, EPA encourages states and tribes to integrate
source water into updates of watershed assessments and plans, including incorporating ground water
and the ground water / surface water interchange, and in the course of doing so consider the effects of
climate change on fresh water resources. See Section II.B. for additional discussion on the Source Water
and Ground Water. Tribes should refer to the Final Guidance on Awards of Grants to Indian Tribes under
106
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State, Interstate, and Tribal Grant Recipients
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act, in particular the Understanding Source Water Protection and
Conducting a Source Water Assessment sections.
Non-point Source: States, territories, and tribes may use CWA Section 106 funds to develop watershed-
based plans and to conduct monitoring on a watershed basis. States' and where appropriate, tribes'
integrated monitoring designs should use a combination of statistical surveys and targeted monitoring
to cost-effectively evaluate the health of watersheds and the effectiveness of protection and restoration
actions, such as nonpoint source implementation projects. In addition, EPA encourages, consistent with
the scope of CWA Section 106, broader efforts to protect and maintain healthy watersheds, so that
costly implementation measures are not required to restore water quality and aquatic habitat.
Protecting Wetlands: Some states and tribes have utilized CWA Section 106 funds for program
implementation, including wetlands monitoring and protection projects.
Other Guidance: Guidance for the Tribal Program, the Monitoring Initiative, and Enforcement is
provided separately and can be found at:
• Tribal water pollution control programs. See http://epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/106tgg07.htm.
• State and interstate use of Monitoring Initiative funds. See http://epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/106-
guidelines-monitor.htm.
• Associated Program Support Costs. Generally, the associated program support costs authority is
used to support activities that promote the common goals of the requesting state(s) and tribe(s)
and/or promote administrative efficiency and cost savings to the recipients. For EPA to use Section
106 resources as associated program support, the activity must: (a) be the inherent responsibility of
a state, tribal, territory, or interstate water pollution control agency and (b) be of primary benefit to
these agencies and not EPA. EPA must get the prior approval of these agencies before such funding
can be reserved for associated program support activities. Associated program support can be
provided by EPA through a grant, contract, or interagency agreement. See
http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/cwf/upload/Section-106-APSC-Guidance-Final.pdf.
• Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) National Program Manager Guidance. In
October 2009, EPA issued the Clean Water Act Action Plan ("the Action Plan"). The Action Plan
identifies changes that are designed to revamp the NPDES permitting, compliance and enforcement
program to better address today's serious water quality problems. For the enforcement program,
the Action Plan provides new approaches to identify and prioritize the most serious violations for
enforcement response to protect water quality and human health. The Office of Water continues to
work with the OECA, EPA regions, and states to implement the Action Plan. For more information on
Clean Water Act enforcement and compliance activities, please see the current OECA National
Program Manager Guidance at http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/national-program-manager-
guidances.
107
------- |