FY2016-2017
National Water Program
Guidance
Office of Water
April 2015
j.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
/J£N
EPA420-R-15-008
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 3
II. National Water Program Areas of Focus Guidance 6
A. Protecting Populations at Risk 6
1. Children's Health 6
2. Environmental Justice 6
B. Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality 9
Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality Activities for FY 2016-
201710
Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality Program Measures.... 10
C. Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure 11
Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure Activities for FY 2016-2017 13
Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure Program Measures 15
D. Controlling Nutrient Pollution 15
Controlling Nutrient Pollution Activities for FY2016-2017 16
Performance Measures for Controlling Nutrient Pollution 16
E. Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information 16
Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information Activities for FY 2016-2017 18
Program Measures for Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information 19
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 29
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 41
1. Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 41
2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters 55
Office of Water Page 1 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
3. Increase Wetlands 58
D. Strategies to Protect and Restore the Health of Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems 60
1. The Great Lakes 60
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
8. The South Florida Ecosystem 70
9. The Columbia River Basin 72
10. The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 73
Appendices
A. FY 2016 National Water Program Measures
B. Explanation of Key Changes Summary
C. Key Contacts
D. Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106 State and Interstate Grant Recipients
Office of Water Page 2 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
I. Introduction
The FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance describes how the Environmental Protection Agency's
Office of Water (OW) will work with states, territories, and tribal governments to protect and improve the
quality of the Nation's waters both at the tap and in the environment. OW will also strive to continue
identifying new approaches and partnerships to make and sustain improvements in public health and the
environment.
The Office of Water is housed at EPA's headquarters and manages the delivery of the national water programs.
The regional offices work with states, tribes, territories, and other stakeholders to implement OW's programs.
In drafting this Guidance, OW recognizes the challenges that states, communities, and local governments face
when it comes to satisfying the public's wastewater and drinking water needs while helping to reduce pollution
and public health threats. OW addresses those challenges by supporting water programs that improve
infrastructure, drive innovation, spurs technology, and increases sustainability, and by strengthening
partnerships at the state, federal and local levels.
Structure of OW's Guidance:
Section II, National Areas of Focus Guidance: This section describes priority program areas for FY 2016-
2017. EPA, states, and tribes should provide special attention to these national priority areas to ensure the
safety and cleanliness of water consumed by people in the United States. In requesting special attention,
however, OW recognizes that EPA regional offices, states, and tribes need flexibility allocating resources to
achieve clean water and safe drinking water goals, given their specific circumstances. We look forward to
strengthening partnerships as we move toward meeting those goals.
Section III. Program Specific Guidance: This section describes key actions to accomplish the public health and
environmental goals outlined in EPA's Strategic Plan1. The Strategic Plan addresses national water programs
listed in Goal 2; Protecting America's Waters. Goal 2 has two key objectives: Protect Human Health and
Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems. The key objectives listed in Goal 2 are supported by
various subobjectives that define specific environmental or public health commitments established by the
National Water Program.
The Office of Water's Guidance is organized into 15 subobjectives2 and cross-cutting water themes. These
subobjectives and cross-cutting themes describe the progress that EPA's Office of Water will strive to achieve
during fiscal years 2016 and 2017. OW's Guidance also describes the program strategies that we will use to
accomplish our objectives. The subobjectives are organized categorized in three subsections:
Protect human health by improving the quality of drinking water, providing for safer fish and shellfish
consumption, and assuring that recreational waters are safe for swimming
Protect and restore the quality of the Nation's fresh waters, coastal waters, and wetlands
Protect and restore the health of large aquatic ecosystems across the country
Performance Measure information:
1 The EPA Strategic Plan is available at FY2016-2018 EPA Strategic Plan.
2 The Guidance also contains one additional section covering the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary.
Office of Water Page 3 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Appendix A includes a comprehensive list of performance measures. OW's performance measures have
two purposes: support the subobjective strategies and assist the management of water programs. Measure
information, including definition and methodology, is available online3.
OW's Guidance includes two types of performance measures:
"Outcome" Strategic Target Measures: Environmental or public health impacts (outcome) measures are
described in the EPA Strategic Plan with long-range targets and in this Guidance.
National Program Activity Measures (PAMs): Core water PAMs address activities and outputs
resulting from program implementation by EPA, states, and tribes. These measures monitor programs'
progress in accomplishing the goals stated in EPA's Strategic Plan. Many PAMs have national and
regional "targets" for FY 2016. These targets serve as a point of reference to EPA's regional work with
states and tribes. In addition to the national outcome measures and PAMs this guidance also includes
outcome measures and PAMs specific to major ecosystems addressed by our water programs. These
measures track progress in restoring and protecting these major ecosystems and are tailored to the specific
problems in these systems and the programs developed to address them.
The process for managing water program strategies is divided into three parts:
Part 1, the development of OW's Guidance'.
o The Office of Water also 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 draft FY 2016-2017 NWPG.
o Regional and headquarter offices reviewed measures in the fall of 2014. OW drafted a Guidance
in February 2015 which was reviewed by both internal and external stakeholders, and the final
Guidance by April 2015.
Part 2, consultation and planning: EPA regions work with states, and tribes to develop detailed program
implementation agreements. The purpose of the consultation is to convert the "targets" in OW's Guidance
into regional "commitments" that are supported by Performance Partnership Agreements and other grant
workplans with states and tribes. The process of consultation allocates available resources to program
activities that are likely to result in optimal progress toward accomplishing water quality and public health
goals while taking into account the circumstances and needs of the states and regions.
Part 3, assessing progress: OW will continue to assess progress to program implementation and
performance during Fiscal years 2016 and 2017.
Grants Management:
OW will promote effective grants management to improve program performance. EPA has issued
directives, policies, and guidance to help improve grants management. OW's policy requires all grantees
to comply with applicable grants requirement even if program-specific guidance does not addresses the
requirements.
3 Supplemental information to the Guidance is at FY2016 National Water Program Measures.
Office of Water Page 4 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
EPA-States E-Enterprise for the Environment
Consistent with Section V of the Overview to the FY 2016-2017 NPM Guidances, this Guidance
identifies and describes projects that the Office of Water is leading, supporting, or evaluating. These are
current examples of priority activities at different stages of definition and progress - which align with
the E-Enterprise goals. Over the period of this NPM Guidance, we will complete some of these activities,
substantially modify others, and develop and implement new projects. The Office of Water encourages
states, tribes and other offices to coordinate with or participate in these projects where they see
complementary priorities, processes, or objectives. Please refer to The Office of Chief Financial Officer
(OCFO) Overview to the final FY2016-2017 National Program Manager (NPM) Guidances4 for
additional information about E-enterprises. General E-enterprise information5, FY2015 action plan6,
Cross-Agency Strategies7, and "About E-Enterprises for the Environment8" are also good resources to
learn more about this E-enterprise goals.
The Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Overview:
The Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Overview 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.
Key contacts for the Office of Water's Guidance:
Michael Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water.
Tim Fontaine, Senior Budget Officer and Director of Resource Management Staff.
Sharon Vazquez, Program Evaluation and Planning Team Lead.
Venus Miranda Reyes, Program Analyst.
Key contacts by subobjective are listed in Appendix B and posted with other related documents at NWPG Key
Contacts.
4 Read the Agency's Overview
5 General E-Enterprise information: http://www2.epa. gov/e-enterprise and http://www.exchangenetwork.net/e-
enterprise/
6 FY2015 Action Plan
7 Cross-Agency Strategies
8 "About E-Enterprises for the Environment"
Office of Water Page 5 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
II. National Water Program Areas of Focus Guidance
A. Protecting Populations at Risk
1. Children's Health
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 (TMF)
capacity to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requirements, including maintaining a certified
operator.
Children's Health Activities 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).9
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
201410, 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 populations 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.
9 Read more on RTCR
10 Read more on Plan EJ 2014
Office of Water Page 6 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Environmental Justice Activities for FY 2016-2017
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 Program11 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 Program12 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 U.S. Department of Housing and
11 Read more on the Urban Waters Program
12 Read more on tribal program funding
Office of Water Page 7 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Urban Development (HUD) through the Infrastructure Task Force (ITF)13 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 ANV14 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. Additionally, EPA will provide funding for ANV infrastructure needs
through the clean water and drinking water tribal set-aside programs15. 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.
Environmental Justice Performance Measures
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 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
13 Read more on ITF
14 Read more on ANV
15 Read more on the Tribal Set-Asides Program
Office of Water Page 8 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
all applicable health-based drinking water standards compared to the U.S. population on the whole. In addition,
measure SDW-18-N.il 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 populations 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.
B. Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water
Quality
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)16
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 RTCR17 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 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
16 Read more on TCR
17 Read more on RTCR
Office of Water Page 9 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality Activities
for FY 2016-2017
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.l.
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.
Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality Program
Measures
Subobiective2.1.1 and measures SDW-211, SDW-SP1.N11, SDW-SP2, and SDW-SP3.Nllwill reflect
compliance with the RTCR starting in FY 2016.
WQ-11 (page 4, Appendix A) tracks the cumulative number, and national percent, of follow-up actions
that are completed by assessed NPDES programs.
Office of Water Page 10 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
C. Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure
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.18 Source water includes
surface water and ground water, as well as the interchange between them19. 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 PWSs20 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.21 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.22 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 the remaining healthy aquatic ecosystems.23 This is due to other significant causes including habitat
loss and fragmentation, hydrologic alteration and loss of connectivity, invasive species, and climate change.
18 Read more on SWP
19 Read more on ground water
20 Read more on Small Systems
21 Read more on Capacity Development
22 Read more on water infrastructure sustainabilitv
23 Heinz Center. State of the Nation's Ecosystems Report. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2008.
Office of Water Page 11 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
The Healthy Watersheds Initiative24 (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.25 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.C). 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 Program26,
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.
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. Should Congressional funding be available, EPA will also
24 Read more on the HWI and C. 1 .b.
25 U.S. EPA (2011). Healthy Watersheds Initiative: National Framework and Action Plan. Office of Water. EPA
841-R-11-005. Read more on HWI
26 Read more on the Sustainable Infrastructure Program
Office of Water Page 12 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 and will be implemented in a manner that
complements SRF programs. 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.
Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure Activities for FY 2016-
2017
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
(DWMAPS), to identify threats to drinking water sources and prioritize protective actions.
Office of Water Page 13 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
To support Capacity Development for drinking water systems, EPA will continue to collaborate with states
and other partners on a variety of activities, including:
Sharing of tools, approaches, best practices, and innovations to promote sustainable practices, including
asset management27 and energy and water efficiency,28 in drinking water systems.
Promoting the use of the Check Up Program for Small Systems (CUPSS) asset management software.29
Promoting EPA's Energy Use Assessment Tool30 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.31
Disseminating best practices and maintaining focus to assist non-CWSs, including campgrounds,
restaurants, and hospitals, in reliably providing safe drinking water.32
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.33
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.
34
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:
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.
27 Read more on Asset Management
28 Read more on Water and Energy Efficiency
29 Read more on CUPSS
30 Read more on the Energy Use Assessment Tool
31 Read more on water efficiency
32 Read about Non-Community Water Systems
33 Read more on Water Sector Workforce
34 Read more on Water System Partnerships
Office of Water Page 14 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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's State Revolving Fund programs will continue to emphasize program oversight.
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).
Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure Program Measures
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.35 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.
D. Controlling Nutrient Pollution
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"36. 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 consideration was given to impaired
35 Read more on EPA's Small Systems Agency Priority Goal.
36 Read the memorandum
Office of Water Page 15 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Controlling Nutrient Pollution Activities for FY2016-2017
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 2016 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.
Performance Measures for Controlling Nutrient Pollution
WQ-Ola and WQ-Old track the number of numeric WQS for total nitrogen and total phosphorus adopted
by states and territories and approved by EPA, or promulgated by EPA plus those planned for adoption
within the next three years.
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.
E. Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information
Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). Accurate, complete, and transparent system
performance data is essential in understanding how the nation's PWSs are faring in meeting the expectation of
Office of Water Page 16 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
delivering high quality safe drinking water to consumers. SDWIS37 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.
Developing E-Enterprise for the Environment Solutions for Water Programs, SDWIS. EPA is replacing
the existing SDWIS State software38 and the SDWIS Fed Operational Data Store with SDWIS Primacy
Agency (Prime). EPA is employing E-Enterprise for the Environment principles of shared governance with
states and leveraging E-Enterprise for the Environment solutions in developing the next generation of SDWIS.
SDWIS Prime will 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;
provide tools to ensure consistent determinations for compliance with drinking water rules; improve data
quality; and support efficient sharing of drinking water compliance monitoring data between EPA, states, and
the public. EPA is developing tools and processes to assist states in transitioning to use of SDWIS Prime.
Enhancing Access to Drinking Water System Compliance Information. In March 2010, EPA announced
the Drinking Water Strategy (Strategy)39, 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 employing E-Enterprise for the Environment principles of shared
governance with states and 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, improve data quality, and will facilitate more efficient
sharing of data among EPA, states, and the public.
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.
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
37 Read more on SDWIS
38 Read more on SDWIS State
39 Read more on the Drinking Water Strategy
Office of Water Page 17 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
through the Storage and Retrieval Data Warehouse (STORET)40 and the Water Quality data portal and
expanded display of water quality information via How's My Waterway website/app41.
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.
Also as part of e-Enterprise, EPA is scoping out an EPA/Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) effort
that will improve how data collected from sensors can be discoverable and interoperable across the multiple
entities that are collecting data using sensors. In FY2016-2017 EPA will identify 3-5 watersheds where EPA
would work with partners at all levels (Federal, state, tribal, and local) who are collecting water quality data as
well as partners collecting water quantity data to demonstrate the seamless sharing of sensor data in a common
format across multiple platforms. We envision that by working with the private sector (manufacturers of
sensors and data loggers, telemetry vendors, and data management providers) EPA could demonstrate the
ability for partners to be able to retrieve, QA/QC, analyze, and share their data seamlessly. Based on what's
learned in these watershed demonstration projects, EPA would seek to expand this capability nationwide.
Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information Activities for FY 2016-2017
Drinking Water Information
1. States will participate in EPA-led development sessions to complete SDWIS Prime. During FY 2016, state
SDWIS Prime Transition Teams will also prepare to migrate data from SDWIS State and state-developed
data systems to SDWIS Prime and will prepare to reconfigure state developed applications to interact with
SDWIS Prime instead of with SDWIS State. States will begin utilizing SDWIS Prime during FY2017
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. EPA will manage a contract vehicle for states to fund tasks related to SDWIS Prime
and Compliance Monitoring Data Portal. States can apply for Exchange Network grants and can utilize
Public Water System Supervision grant funds and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds for eligible state
activities related to SDWIS Prime and the Compliance Monitoring Data Portal.
Clean Water Information
40 Read more on STORET
41 Access "How's My Waterway?"
Office of Water Page 18 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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
NHDPlus 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.
Program Measures for Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information
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.
Office of Water Page 19 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
III. National Water Program (Subobjective) Specific
Guidance
A. Cross-Cutting Themes
1. National Water Program and Tribes
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 FY 2014-2018 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 Health42.
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.
Tribal Activities for FY 2016-2017
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 Tribes43 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.
42 Please see Protecting Populations at Risk, Section II. A. in this Guidance.
43 Read more on the EPA Policy
Office of Water Page 20 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Update OW's website to improve access to tribally-relevant information.
Continue National Water Program management support and involvement at the highest levels.
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.Nl 1 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.l.a.i.
o Restore and improve water quality on a watershed basis. See Section IILC.l.b on HWI.
o Develop and manage NPS pollution programs (e.g. through watershed-based plans, BMPs, and
restoration activities). See Section III.C.l.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 (IHS), 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 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Tribal Supporting Performance Measures
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.Nl 1; WQ-SP14b.Nl 1; WQ-02; WQ-03b; WQ-
12b; WQ-19b; WQ-23; WQ-24.N11.
Increase Wetlands: WT-SP22; WT-02a.
2. Protecting Urban Waters
The goal of the Urban Waters Program44 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.
Urban Water Activities for FY 2016-2017
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 Partnership45 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 Grants46 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 Program47.
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.48
44 Read more on the Urban Waters Program
45 Read more on the Urban Waters Federal Partnership.
46 Read more on Urban Waters Small Grants.
47 Read more on the Urban Waters Learning Network.
48 Read more.
Office of Water Page 22 of 74
-------
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.
Urban Water Performance Measures
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. Climate Change
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 Change49 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.
Climate Change Activities for FY 2016-2017
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
Plans50 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
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
49 Read more on the National Water Program 2012 Strategy: Response to Climate Change.
50 Read more on the Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plans.
Office of Water Page 23 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 promote consideration of climate-related
adjustments to water programs developed during 2014 and 2015 that are designed to increase the
resilience of water resources to climate change impacts. This could take place in conjunction with:
o Management of clean water and drinking water State Revolving Funds;
o Triennial reviews of state and tribal water quality standards;
o Development of NPDES permits with a focus on stream flow, precipitation, and water
temperature;
o State water quality management plans or related planning mechanisms
o 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 Plans51',
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
Promote greater energy efficiency in the water sector through partnerships and technical assistance
providers; 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:
51 Read more on Being Prepared for Climate Change: A Workbook for Developing Risk-Based Adaptation Plans.
Office of Water Page 24 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Number of water or wastewater utilities that have registered to use Climate Resilience Evaluation and
Awareness Tool (GREAT) tool.
Number of CWSRFs/DWSRFs that used financial incentives to promote climate resilience
projects in the last year.
Measures supporting the Strategic Plan goal of reducing greenhouse gas releases include:
Number of WaterSense partners working to improve water use efficiency.
Number of water and wastewater utilities that use the Energy Star Portfolio Manager to manage
energy.
4. Implementing Innovative Technology in Water
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 competitors52.
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.
52 Read more on the vision for technology innovation
Office of Water Page 25 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
The previous Acting Assistant Administrator for OW, Nancy Stoner, released a Technology Innovation
Blueprint53, which identifies the actions, challenges, and the path forward to employ the above priority list in
assisting with current water resource issues.
Innovative Technology Activities for FY 2016-2017
EPA's National Water Program will foster water technology and innovation through many different
forums in cooperation with states and the full spectrum of water partners. These efforts will be routinely
summarized on the Technology and Innovation webpage and in progress reports.
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.
5. Grants Management
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.
a. Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements
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 5700.5A154, 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
53 Read more on OW's blueprint for technology innovation
54 Read more on the Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements.
Office of Water Page 26 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
requirements related to Grants.gov55, 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 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.
b. Policy on Compliance Review and Monitoring
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 OIG. 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.
c. Performance Standards for Grants Management
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
55 Access Grants.gov
Office of Water Page 27 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
d. Environmental Results Under EPA Assistance Agreements
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.
e. Policy on Streamlining State Grants
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 Reports56. 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 Application57) 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
Funds58. 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.
56 Read more on the State Grant Workplans and Progress Reports.
51 Read more.
58 Read more on Timely Obligation, Award and Expenditure of EPA Grant Funds.
Office of Water Page 28 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
B. Strategies to Protect Public Health
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. This Guidance draws from
the Strategic Plan, but describes plans and strategies at a more operational level and focuses on FY 2016.
1. Water Safe to Drink
The fundamental public health protection mission of the national drinking water program59 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 CWSs60 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. Implement Core National Drinking Water Program Areas that are Critical to Providing Safe Drinking
Water.
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)61 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 NPDWR62 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)63; as reporting, analysis,
and posting of monitoring results will continue through mid-2016.
59 Read more on drinking water.
60 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.
61 Read more on CCLs.
62 Read more on NPDWRs.
63 Read more on UCMR3.
Office of Water Page 29 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
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.
Implementation of Drinking Water Standards/Regulations and Technical Assistance 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:
Office of Water Page 30 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Conduct Sanitary Surveys64: 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.
Conduct Technical Assistance and Training65: 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 Rule66 and the Stage 2 Disinfection/Disinfection By-
Products Rule67. 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 AWOP68, 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 program69 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. DWSRF70 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
64 Read more on sanitary surveys.
65 Read more on EPA's training on the National Primary Drinking Water Rules
66 Read more on the Groundwater Rule (GWRX
67 Read more on the Stage 2 DBF rule.
68 Read more on AWOP.
69 Read more on SDWIS State.
70
Read more on DWSRF.
Office of Water Page 31 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
the program through strong auditing, consistent with overarching federal law and guidance; and enhancing
coordination between the DWSRF and PWSS programs.
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 utilization71 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 Survey72 of
approximately 52,000 CWSs and 21,400 not-for-profit non-CWSs.
Use the program's new model Intended Use Plan (IUP)73 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 Policy74 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.75
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 Security76. 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
71 Read more on the fund utilization rate.
72 Read more on the Needs Survey.
73 Read more on intended use plans.
74 Read more on the SRF Sustainabilitv Policy
75
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/dwsrf/pdfs/capdev.pdf.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrfypdfs/opcert.pdf.
76 Read more on water system security.
Office of Water Page 32 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
encourage water and wastewater utilities to use the Cybersecurity Framework and 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)77 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
77 Read more on WSI.
Office of Water Page 33 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
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 Programs78. 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 Control79. 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.
78 Read more on SWP.
79 Read more on UIC.
Office of Water Page 34 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Ensure that hydraulic fracturing using diesel fuels are authorized under the applicable UIC program.
b. Improvement of small drinking water system technical, managerial, and financial capacity.
See National Water Program Area of Focus in Section II. C, Improving Small System Capacity.
c. Grant Guidances
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 2016.
Public Water System Supervision Grant Guidance to states, tribes, and EPA regions with primacy
enforcement authority
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
2016 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 program80 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.
80 Read more on the PWSS Grant Program and the Tribal PWSS Grant Program.
Office of Water Page 35 of 74
-------
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.
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Grant Guidance to states
This Guidance for FY 2016 and FY 2017 includes guidance for state recipients of DWSRF program grants81.
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 List is a required element of the IUP.
81 Read more on DWSRF grant programs.
Office of Water Page 36 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 AREA, 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.
Underground Injection Control Grants Grant Guidance to states and tribes
The UIC 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 UIC grant program funds. Each
year, grant funds are distributed by the national UIC Program to help UIC programs enforce the minimum
federal UIC 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 UIC 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;
Office of Water Page 37 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Ensuring that Class I, II and III (salt solution) wells that lose mechanical integrity are returned to
compliance;
Addressing high priority Class V wells; and
Populating the UIC National Database by sharing well specific data.
The grant allotments are determined by the UIC Grant Allocation Model and follow the criteria identified in
SDWA Section 1443 which requires UIC allocations to be based on such factors as "population, geographic
area, extent of underground injection practices, and other relevant factors."
2. Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
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.
Fish and Shellfish Activities for FY 2016-2017
Reduce Air Deposition of Mercury. Most fish advisories are for mercury82, 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.
82 Read more on fish consumption advisories.
Office of Water Page 38 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Another key element of the strategy is to expand and improve information and notification of the risks offish
consumption. As part of this work, EPA is also encouraging and supporting states and tribes to adopt the 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.
Fish and Shellfish Performance Measures
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.
3. Water Safe for Swimming
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 2016, 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.
Safe Swimming Activities for FY 2016-2017
Focusing on the Implementation of the 2012 Recommended Water Quality Criteria (RWQC). EPA
published final revised recreational water quality criteria in December 201283. 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.
83 Read more.
Office of Water Page 39 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
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 2016 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 2016 (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.
Office of Water Page 40 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
C. Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands
1. Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
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:
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.
a. Implement Core Clean Water Programs to Protect All Waters Nationwide
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 addition, EPA
anticipates more states and tribes will pursue wetland program and implementation funding through Section
106 grants,having made significant progress in building capacity under the Wetland Program Development
Grants over the past 20 years. The ability of states and tribes to combine program funding sources and
authorities supports watershed and basin-wide approaches to achieve yield greater results.
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
Office of Water Page 41 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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;
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.
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes: General Information
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.l 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.l, 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.84
State and Interstate use of Monitoring Initiative funds.85
Water pollution enforcement activities.86
i. Strengthen Water Quality Standards Program
WQS87 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.
84 Read more. Tribes with EPA-approved WQS should also see the Section 106 guidance on WQS for states,
interstate agencies, and authorized tribes below.
85 Read more.
86 Read more.
87 Read more.
Office of Water Page 42 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Water Quality Standards Activities for FY 2016-2017
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 health (see
measure WQ-Ola). Please also see discussion on Controlling Nutrient Pollution in Section IIP.
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 Act88. 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).
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States, Interstate Agencies, and Authorized Tribes: Water Quality
Standards.
It is EPA's objective for states and authorized tribes89 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
88 Read the Final Section 106 Tribal Grant Guidance.
89 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 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 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.
ii. Improve Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment
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
monitoring90 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 Assessment, 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 for state waters; 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
over time. 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. This
indicator measure positions states to develop a baseline from which to track long term water quality changes
90 Read more on monitoring data.
Office of Water Page 44 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
across the population of waters within their state, with documents confidence. 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.
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.Nl 1 and WQ-SP14b.Nl 1).
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 MOU 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.
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes: Monitoring
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"91 (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 Guidance92. 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
91 Read more on the Elements Guidance.
92 Read more on the Elements Guidance.
Office of Water Page 45 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
report water quality data annually.93 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 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.
iii. Implement TMDLs and Other Watershed Related Plans
The CWA 303(d) program is continuing to work with states to implement the 303(d) Program Vision94 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,95 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/programs96. Through partnerships with the
93 Read more on STORET and WOX.
94 Read more on the 303(d) Program Vision.
95 Read more on the 303(d) and TMDL Program.
96 Read more on TMDLs.
Office of Water Page 46 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
states, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), USFS97, 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 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 (NHD/YMs) to calculate priority watershed areas using the NHDP/M5 '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 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.
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes: Identifying Impairments and
Developing TMDLs
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
' Read more on partnership with U.S. Forest Service.
Office of Water Page 47 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
iv. Strengthen the NPDES Permit Program
The NPDES Program98 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 Plan". 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 Items100: 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.
98 Read more on the NPDES Program.
99 Read more on the CWA Action Plan.
100 Read more on PQRs.
Office of Water Page 48 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 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 Infrastructure101: As discussed in Section II.C. Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and
Infrastructure, EPA released a new Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda102 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.
Pesticides103: 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.104
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
101 Read more on green infrastructure.
102 Read more on the Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda.
103 Read more.
104 Read more.
Office of Water Page 49 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Stormwater105: 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 Bay TMDL106, 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. EPA continues to work with states and other stakeholders to develop a compendium of
performance data for a spectrum of design and operational options associated with blending wet weather flows
that will help inform discussions to resolve longstanding issues related to blending.
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 OECA further 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 framework707 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"10^ that identifies issues the Agency is working
closely with local governments to clarify. On November 24, 2014, EPA released the Financial Capability
Assessment Framework109 that discusses key elements of EPA's approach in working with permittees and
105 Read more.
106 Read more on the Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
107 Read the October 27. 2011 and June 5. 2012 memorandums.
108 Read more on the "Assessing Financial Capability for Municipal Clean Water Act Requirements" memorandum.
109 Read the November 24. 2014. framework.
Office of Water Page 50 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
provides examples of additional information that may help communities provide a more complete and accurate
picture of 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.
Pretreatment110: 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 Plan111, 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. OW continues to work with OECA
on the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule, as part of E-Enterprise (expected to be finalized by the end of
calendar year 2015, and will continue to advance E-Enterprise activities whether related to this rulemaking or
other efforts.
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and Interstate Agencies: Permits, Enforcement, and Compliance
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..
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
storm water 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 applicable NPDES-regulated facilities are required
110 Read more on the Pretreatment Program.
111 Read more on the CWA Action Plan.
Office of Water Page 51 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 Plan112. OW and states will be working closely with OECA as the CWA Action Plan is implemented.
v. Implement Practices to Reduce Pollution from all Nonpoint Sources
As highlighted briefly in the Controlling Nutrient Pollution, Section IIP. NPS pollution113 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
(NWQI), continuing to leverage our respective programs and to support states' monitoring water quality results
from the partnership in selected NWQI 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". Tribes will continue
to follow the separate tribal Section 319 guidelines.
vi. Implement the CWSRF
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
112 Read more on the CWA Action Plan.
113 Read more on nonpoint source pollution.
Office of Water Page 52 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
b. Accelerate Watershed Protection
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 HWI114.
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 document115 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 (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 Plan116, 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;
114 Read more.
115 Read more at U.S. EPA (2012). Identifying and Protecting Healthy Watersheds Concepts, Assessments, and
Management Approaches. EPA 841-B-11-002.
116 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 53 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
c. Define Waterbody/Watershed Standards Attainment Goals and Strategies
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.
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 (NHDPlus) to calculate watershed area for using
the NHDP/M5 '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
Office of Water Page 54 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans are among the most productive ecosystems on earth117. 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.
Coastal and Ocean Waters Activities for FY 2016-2017
1) Coastal Monitoring and Assessment. EPA has made improved monitoring of water quality
conditions118 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 waters119. 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
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.
117 Read more.
118 Read more.
119 Read more.
Office of Water Page 55 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 NEP120. 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, orNEPs, 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 Estuaries121: 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,
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
120 Read more on NEPs.
121 Read on Climate Ready Estuaries.
Office of Water Page 56 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 comment on whether there
are other ways to measure or explain program progress and/or achievements.
Coastal and Ocean Waters Program Measures
CO-432.N11 tracks the number of habitat acres protected or restored within NEP study areas.
Office of Water Page 57 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
3. Increase Wetlands
EPA's Wetlands Program122 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.
Wetlands Activities for FY 2016-2017
No Net Loss. EPA contributes to achieving no overall net loss of wetlands through the wetlands regulatory
program established under CWA Section 404123. 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 Rule124.
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)).
States and tribes can assist EPA in these reviews by sharing their CWA Section 401 certifications on
USACE permits125.
122 Read more on wetlands.
123 Read more on CWA Section 404.
124 Read more on the 2015 Clean Water Rule.
125 Read more on CWA Section 401.
Office of Water Page 58 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 Programs126: 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 system, known
as OMBIL127 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.
126 Read more.
127 Operations and Maintenance Business Information Link (OMBIL)
Office of Water Page 59 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Wetland Monitoring128: 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
NWCA, 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.
Wetlands Performance Measures
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.
D. Strategies to Protect and Restore the Health of Communities and Large Aquatic
Ecosystems
1. The Great Lakes
The goal of EPA's Great Lakes program129 is to restore and maintain the environmental integrity of the Great
Lakes ecosystem, as mandated by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)130, the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement, and CWA. As the primary means of accomplishing this goal, EPA leads the Interagency
128 Read more on wetland monitoring.
129 Read more on EPA's Great Lakes Program.
130 Read more on the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.
Office of Water Page 60 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Task Force in implementation of the FY 2015 to FY 2019 GLRI Action Plan131. 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.
Great Lakes Activities for FY 2016-2017
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.
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
131 Read more on the FY 2015 to FY 2019 GLRI Action Plan.
Office of Water Page 61 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Implement a science-based adaptive management approach for GLRI. The GLRI science-based
adaptive management process132 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.
Great Lakes Performance Measures
The Great Lakes Program has a suite of 10 measures.
2. The Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP)133 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.
Chesapeake Bay Activities for FY 2016-2017
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.134 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-the-ground actions
necessary to achieve the goals of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. EPA will continue to implement key initiatives
132 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.
133 Read more on the CBP at http://www.epa.gov/region3/chesapeake/ and http://www.chesapeakebav.net/.
134 Read more on the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement.
Office of Water Page 63 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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 ChesapeakeSYa?; 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.135
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. ChesapeakeSYa? is a key element in the next generation of tools that EPA is developing to
significantly enhance the accountability of program partners. ChesapeakeSYa? 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 ChesapeakeSYa? 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 2015136. To ensure that the Bay jurisdictions are effectively implementing the TMDL,
EPA will improve and expand the Bay Tracking and 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
135 Read more on EPA's technical memoranda for water quality trading and offsets in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed.
136 Read more on the milestones related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Office of Water Page 64 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Chesapeake Bay Performance Measures
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.
3. The Gulf of Mexico
The Gulf of Mexico basin137 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.
Gulf of Mexico Activities for FY 2016-2017
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.The Clean Water Act provides authority and resources that are essential to protecting
water quality in the Gulf of Mexico and in the larger Mississippi River Basin, which contributes pollution,
especially oxygen demanding nutrients, to the Gulf. Enhanced monitoring and 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
137 Read more on the Gulf of Mexico Program.
Office of Water Page 65 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Gulf of Mexico Performance Measures
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 acres restored, enhanced, or protected in the Gulf.
GM-SP40.N11 is a long term measure tracking the size of the hypoxic zone in the Gulf. 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
Office of Water Page 66 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
habitat quality. Additional performance measure changes have been submitted and are under review and
consideration.
4. Long Island Sound
EPA coordinates the Long Island Sound Study (LISS)138 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.
Long Island Sound Activities for FY 2016-2017
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.
Long Island Sound Performance Measures
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.
5. The Puget Sound
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 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,
138 Read more on LISS.
Office of Water Page 67 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
and defense installations. The EPA's Puget Sound Program139 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.
Puget Sound Activities for FY 2016-2017
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 Agenda140, 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.
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
139 Read more on the Puget Sound Program.
140 Read more on the Puget Sound Action Agenda
Office of Water Page 68 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Puget Sound Performance Measures
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.
6. U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
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 Region141. The bi-national agreement that guides efforts to improve
environmental conditions in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region is the Border 2020 framework^2. 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 NAFTA143-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.
U.S.-Mexico Border Activities for FY 2016-2017
Under the Border 2020 Plan, EPA expects to take the following key actions to improve water quality and
protect public health.
Core Flagrant 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 infrastructure planning and design as part of 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
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.
141 Read more on the U.S.-Mexico Border Program at http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/ and
http ://water. epa. gov/infrastructure/waste water/mexican/index. cfm.
142 Read more on Border 2020.
143 North American Free Trade Agreement
Office of Water Page 69 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
U.S.-Mexico Border Program Measures
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.
7. Pacific Island Territories
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.144
Pacific Island Territories Activities for FY 2016-2017
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.
Pacific Island Territories Performance Measures
PI-SP26 tracks the percent of the population that has access to continuous safe drinking water.
8. The South 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)145
is designed to protect and restore communities and ecosystems affected by environmental problems. SFGI
efforts include activities related to the CWA Section 404 wetlands protection program; the Comprehensive
Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)146; WQPP for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS);
and the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI).
144 Read more on EPA's work in the Pacific Islands.
145 Read more on SFGI.
146 Read more on CERP.
Office of Water Page 70 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
South Florida Activities for FY 2016-2017
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.141 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 2016, 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
In March 2000, the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force148 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.
147 Read more on FKNMS.
148 Read more on the Coral Reef Task Force.
Office of Water Page 71 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Support implementation of the SEFCRI program to address land based sources of pollution.
Other Priority Activities for FY2016-2017
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.
South Florida Performance Measures
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.
9. The Columbia River Basin
The Columbia River Basin149 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 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.
149 Read more on the Columbia River Basin.
Office of Water Page 72 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Columbia River Basin Activities for FY 2016-2017
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)
Columbia River Basin Performance Measures
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.
10. The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary
The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary (Bay Delta)150 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 Plan151 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 Fund152.
150 Read more on the Bay Delta.
151 Read more on the Bay Delta Action Plan.
152 Read more on the Bay Area Water Projects.
Office of Water Page 73 of 74
-------
FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
San Francisco Bay Delta Activities for FY 2016-2017
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 Program153, 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 Planning154 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 CCMP155 by reducing
adverse effects of urban/suburban runoff on water quality - through watershed planning, implementation
of TMDLs, and the use of LID and green infrastructure156.
Continuing to administer the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund157.
153 Read more.
154 Read the Handbook.
155 Read the CCMP.
156 Read more on LID.
157 Read more on Bay Area water projects.
Office of Water Page 74 of 74
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
Goal 2 Protecting America's Waters
Objective 2.1 Protect Hunan Health
Subobjective 2.1.1 Water Safe to Drink
i/V-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.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
[in millions)
National Program Manager Comments: The universe represents the population served by
community water systems. The National commitment for FY14 is higher than the regional
mentto be consistent with the FY14 budget tareet.Tribal is included in the
SDW-SP1.N11: Percent of community water systems that meet all applicable health-based
standards through approaches that include effective treatment and source water protect!*
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2014 UNIVERSE
National Program Mai
target is 92%. New me
systems measure
;er Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
ire starting in FY08. Tribal systems are included in the national
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.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2013 UNIVERSE (in millions)
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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 perforn
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measure table in the
National Program Manager Comments: Indicator measure in FY07.
b-SP3.Nll: Percent of the population in Indian country served by community water
mis that receive drinking water that meets all applicable health-based drinking water
standards.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 COMMITMENT
Y 2005 BASELINE
Y 2013 UNIVERSE
ational Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
get is 88%. The universe represents the population in Indian country served by community
systems.
SDW-20: 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.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
BASELINE
UNIVERSE
1,347,168 6,082,620
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY15.
SDW-SP4a: Percent of community water systems where risk to public health is minimized
through source water protection.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2014 UNIVERSE
8.0%
5.0%
8.3%
3.3%
0.2%
4.0%
20%
50,808
48.0%
42.0%
48.3%
41.3%
40.2%
36.4%
20%
50,808
85.0%
84%
86%
84%
66%
64%
51%
2,663
86.0% 4
70%
86%
61%
61%
61%
30%
3,468
4.0%
42%
40%
5%
5%
5%
2%
354
59.0%
58%
57%
55%
52%
52%
21%
8,613
43.1%
41%
41%
41%
40%
38%
19%
7,279
46.8%
40%
45%
43%
40.9%
40%
19%
8,101
11.2%
8%
9%
8%
12%
15%
13%
4,053
.8%
5%
3%
8%
5%
5%
0%
298
10.0%
10%
10%
10%
9%
9%
^^^^^|
4,555
66.0%
40%
66%
44%
42%
40%
28%
4,424
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY08. Note: "Minimized
risk" is achieved by the substantial implementation, as determined by the state, of actions
a source water protection strategy. The universe is the most recent SDWIS inventory of
community water systems. The FY13 NWPG and its Appendix erroneously showed the
incorrect commitment for Region 8.
the population served by community water systems where risk to
blic health is minimized through source water protection.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 UNIVERSE (in millions)
59.0%
57.7%
57.0%
59.1%
55.9%
55.2%
93.0%
300.2
53.
57.
56.
59.
55.
55.
52.
300
% 97%
% 97.0%
% 97%
% 97%
% 97%
% 95.9%
% 93%
2 15.1
80% 70%
86.0% 69.0%
80% 67%
86% 66%
84% 63%
80% 67%
80% 58%
31.7 25.7
60%
60.0%
59%
58%
58%
55%
55%
59.5
65%
67.1%
68%
67%
68.7%
66%
62%
43.1
57%
63.1%
60%
66%
63%
62.9%
62%
38.7
10%
29.1%
20%
21%
20%
23%
20%
12.4
2%
.6%
5%
8%
.5%
0%
0%
3.0
12%
12.0%
12%
12%
12%
12%
12%
48.8
60%
80.0%
80%
80%
81%
84%
82%
12.3
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY08. Note: "Minimized
risk" is achieved by the substantial implementation, as determined by the state, of actions
a source water protection strategy. The universe is the most recent SDWIS inventory of
community water systems. The FY13 NWPG and its Appendix erroneously showed the
incorrect commitment for Region 8.
-18.N11: Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to safe
ling water in coordination with other federal agencies.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
119,000
113,656
119,000
108,881
104,266
110,000
97,311
100,700
80,900
360,000
National Program Manager Comments: New measure for FY11, to supplement SDW-SP5 in
the NWPG and replace it in the Strategic Plan. In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the
2018 target is 148,100.
SDW-Ola: Percent of community water systems (CWSs) that have undergone a sanitary
survey within the past three years (fiveyears for outstanding performers or those grounc
water systems approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 Baseline
Y 2013 Universe
National Program Manager Comments: Universe updated in FY 2014 to reflect the updated
universe (FY 2012) and measure text.
79% 83.9%
87.0%
83.0%
78.7%
49,283
83.9%
87.0%
83.0%
78.7%
49,283
90%
97.0%
70.0%
84.9%
2,619
95%
93.6%
95.0%
86.9%
3,480
93%
93.8%
93.0%
90.0%
4,321
85%
85.3%
80.0%
86.4%
8,493
79%
93.7%
75.0%
79.9%
7,121
90%
100.0%
92.0%
80.0%
7,945
87%
95.7%
87.0%
94.3%
3,999
75% 70%
96.0% 86.0%
78.0% 70.0%
81.2% 66.6%
3,065 4,004
75%
81.3%
75.0%
32.0%
4,236
SDW-Olb: Number of tribal community water systems (CWSs) that have under
survey within the past three years (fiveyears for outstanding performers or thi
water systems approved to provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 Baseline
FY 2013 Universe
National Program Manager Comments: A sanitary survey is an on-site review of the water
sources, facilities, equipment, operation, and maintenance of a public water system for the
purpose of evaluating the adequacy of the facilities for producing and distributing safe
drinking water. Universe updated in FY 2014 to reflect the updated universe (FY 2012) and
measure text.
d utilization rate [cumulative dollar amount of loan agreements divided by
e funds available for projects] for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE (FY 2012, in millions)
89% 89%
92.0%
89.0%
91.4%
89.7%
90%
84.7%
$26,379.6
89%
92.0%
88.0%
91.4%
90.5%
90%
84.7%
$26,379.6
90%
100%
90%
97.3%
95%
92%
78.5%
$2,374.9
90%
90%
90%
93.9%
92%
94%
93%
$4,643.6
89% 85%
100% 86%
89% 85%
100.2% 85.2%
96% 85%
96% 88%
83.3% 88%
$1,563.1 $2,938.5
88%
91%
94%
89.1%
88%
87.1%
87%
$4,574.2
91%
80%
80%
83.0%
82%
87%
64.5%
$2,776.8
83%
86%
80%
83.0%
86%
85%
91%
$1,831.4
88% 90%
89% 103%
88% 87%
88.0% 95.3%
86% 92%
89% 87%
84% 80%
$1,841.9 $2,689.8
95%
110.0%
97%
99.1%
103%
101%
94.3%
$1,151.5
National Program Manager Comments: Universe represents the funds available for projects
for the DWSRF through 2007, in millions of dollars (i.e., the denominator of the measure).
SDW-05: Number of Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) projects that hi
initiated operations, (cumulative)
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Com
363 in ACS).
SDW"°5 ARRA
ments: R9 corrected FY 2012 EOY is 289 (orignalry entered at
9,000
8,251
8,001
7,844
7,474
6,690
6,076
2,611
8,362
8,251
8,001
7,838
7,474
6,721
6,076
2,611
1,180
1,152
1,104
1,092
1,032
924
799
320
21
180
72
72
58
53
48
11
740
718
733
698
678
643
575
261
BBS
885
921
875
863
800
714
369
,750 460
,700 440
,642 427
,630 18
,499 10
,346 54
,250 27
557 9
782 925
782 925
737 921
719 8 0
694 8 4
624 8 4
583 7 6
229 2 2
19
19
00
64
19
63
08
23
600
650
644
600
567
500
446
140
SDW-07: 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.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments: Combined the 3 classes of mechanical integrity
measures into one measure SDW-07a. The denominator for the number of wells with
mechanical integrity losses is very small. Typically, Class I, II and III wells are deep wells and
there are many more Class II wells that lose mechanical integrity relative to Classes I and III
wells (2,800 compared to 8 for Class I and 7 for Class III). The revised measure should improve
the numbers in the denominator of the measure.
SDW-08: Number of Class V motor vehicle waste disposal wells (MVWDW) and large capacity
cesspools (LCC) that are closed or permitted (cumulative).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 BASELINE
5,225
26,751
26,560
26,266
26,027
25,225
25,225
^^H 26,751
26,560
26,266
26,027
25,225
2,380
2,376
2,361
2,349
2,314
883
883
878
868
730
,375
,341
,330
,305
,215
119
117
113
112
109
4,915 2
4,832 2
4,701 2
4,601 2
4,317 2
7
7
5
5
2
8 2,379
8 2,365
6 2,371
6 2,359
5 2,331
3,925 !
3,895 H^|
3,800 !
3,730 |^|
3,560 !
,320
,296
,261
,252
,202
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a chang
and/or in reporting. Mea
FY 2016 OMB Submission. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY 2014-2018
sure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
i 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).
measuretableinthe
includes all the wells covered by the EPA 1999 Class V Rule reporting on closed or permitted
MVWDW wells. In addition, it allows for reporting on additional types of high priority wells
including, at minimum. Large Capacity Cess (LCC) Pools. Reporting in percentages will not
provide good information on progress in closing or permitting the MVWD wells.
SDW-11: Percent of DWSRF projects awarded to small PWS serving <500, 501-3,300, and
3,301-10,000
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
SDW-15: 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.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE (CWS & NTNCWS <10,000 w/ repeat Health-Based Viols)
UNIVERSE (CWS & NTNCWS<10,000)
National Program Mai
SDW-17: Number and percent of schools and childcare centers that meet all health-based
drinking water standards.
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
159
8%
263
0%
230
^^^^^|
1,337
2.1%
1,904
3%
66,156
^^H 1,159
1.8%
1,263
2.0%
1,260
1.9%
1,337
2.1%
98
2.2%
120
2.8%
85
1.9%
112
3.0%
164
3.7%
4,478
49
1%
51
2%
58
0%
84
0%
08
0%
189
56
0.9%
74
1.1%
98
1.5%
109
2.0%
113
1.7%
6,751
65
0.7%
120
1.3%
130
1.3%
127
1.0%
218
2.2%
9,840
75
0.7%
75
0.7%
83
0.7%
85
1.0%
102
1.0%
11,261
271
3.0%
325
3.6%
271
3.0%
243
3.0%
394
4.3%
9,082
1
3.
1
2.
1
3.
1
4.
2
6.
4,5
5 54
% 1.4%
1 59
% 1.6%
3 54
% 1.5%
2 71
% 2.0%
8 91
% 2.5%
62 3,690
164
2.7%
132
2.2%
148
2.5%
133
2.0%
154
2.6%
5,877
82
1.5%
96
1.8%
90
1.7%
101
2.0%
172
3.2%
5,426
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Mi
SDW-19a: Volume of CO2 sequestered through injection as defined by the UIC Final Rule.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments: Measure in millions of gallons.
SDW-19b: Number of permit decisions during the reporting period that result in CO2
sequestered through injection as defined by the UIC Final Rule.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments:
SDW-21: Number of drinking water and wastewater utilities a
officials receiving training and technical assistance to ei
resiliency to reduce risk froi
impacts.
:al, state, and federal
mergency preparedness \
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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 fro
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: Updated data are available from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention approximately every two years. In the FY 2014-2018 EPA
Strategic Plan, the 2018 target is 2.1%.
FS-la: 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)
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Mai
suit is based on data from 2009-2010.
if lake acres where fish tissue were assessed to support waterbody-s|
iption advisories or a determination that no consumption advice is n
;asured separately; Alaska not included) (Report every two years)
FS-lb: Percent of lake acres where fish ti
regional con;
at Lakes
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
35%(14M)
100% (40M)
National Program Mi
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
Y 2010 UNIVERSE
95.0%
95.4%
95.0%
96.0%
95.2%
95.7%
96%
752,683
90.4%
95.4%
91.6%
96.0%
95.1%
95.7%
96%
752,683
98.0%
87.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
97.7%
98%
86,226
95.0%
98.0%
95.0%
97.0%
97.0%
98.0%
97.2%
90,834
95.0%
98.27%
95.0%
98.1%
98.5%
97.3%
98.5%
17,861
92.0%
97.5%
92.0%
97.2%
98.3%
97.7%
96.3%
184,609
90.0%
97.0%
90.0%
94.0%
93.5%
92.0%
95.5%
50,064
80.0%
98.0%
80.0%
95.8%
90.0%
91.0%
93%
28,146
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
88.0%
92.8%
88.0%
93.1%
92.7%
93.0%
95.3%
282,149
85.0%
95.0%
95.0%
95.0%
93.0%
99.0%
92.8%
12,794
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: Universe changes annually. Universe equals the total
number of beach season days associated with the swimming seasons of monitored beaches.
In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018 target is 95%.
SS-1: 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)
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2008 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: Measure revised for FY08. Beginning in FY08, OECA
andOWM agreed on common language and data collection procedures to streamline this
measure. While the definition is slightly different for OWM, the past data is still valid for
comparison with future data. We have included a revised baseline to demonstrate the real
progress for FY08. While national numbers are fairly stable, the Regional baselines did
change.
SS-2: Percent of all Tier I (signifi
the BEACH Act program.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
Y 2013 UNIVERSE
97%
98%
95%
98%
100%
100%
96.5%
2,532
97%
98%
95%
98%
100%
100%
96.5%
2,532
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
162
00% 100% 100%
00% 97% 100%
00% 100% 100%
00% 100% 100%
00% 100% 100%
00% 100% 100%
00% 100% 100%
370 95 736
100%
92.5%
82%
100%
100%
100%
100%
332
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
92%
76
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
90%
100%
90%
99.8%
100%
100%
100%
589
85%
95%
85%
85%
100%
100%
80%
172
National Program Manager Comments: States may change their designation of beaches at
anytime. Therefore, these numbers may change from year to year. Universe equals the total
number of Tier 1 beaches.
Objective 2.2 Protect and Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems
Subobjective 2.2.1 Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
WQ-SP10.N11: Number of waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining water quality
standards where standards are now fully attained, (cumulative)
KPI, BUD
SG, ARRA
Y 2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2002 UNIVERSE
^^^^^^^^B 4,016 3,979
3,866
3,779
3,679
3,527
3,119
39,503
^^H 3,903
3,866
3,779
3,679
3,527
3,119
39,503
164
164
161
156
144
117
6,710
186
184
184
182
176
127
1,805
612
604
610
594
583
557
8,998
625
615
554
544
516
504
5,274
769
769
756
736
736
646
4,550
255
250
248
243
206
190
1,407
469
469
456
443
434
353
2,036
379
375
376
371
371
270
1,274
170
167
160
157
109
105
1,041
274
269
274
253
252
250
6,408
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
target is 4,430. This measure differs from previous Measure L, since WQ-SP10.N11 uses an
updated 2002 baseline. Note: 2000-2002 results equal 1,980 waters - not included above.
2014 303(d) lists were due on 4/1. As of 4/15/2014, many have not arrived. We will continue
to work with our stakeholders over the summer to negotiate and finalize FY15 commitments.
WQ-SP11 BUD 13,288
Y2015 COMMITMENT 12,788
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: 2014 303(d) lists were due on 4/1. As of 4/15/2014,
many have not arrived. We will continue to work with our stakeholders over the summer to
negotiate and finalize FY15 commitments.
13,228
^^| 12,514
12,288
12,134
11,754
11,134
9,527
69,677
12,525
^^H 12,454
12,288
12,129
11,754
11,134
9,527
69,677
484
483
481
481
472
434
369
8,826
620
612
593
593
588
569
456
2,567 1
,125
,115
,083
,050
,996
,903
,814
3,958
1,345
1,343
1,323
1,255
1,235
1,160
1,110
9,374
3,250
3,234
3,234
3,300
3,170
3,170
2,973
10,155
747
732
717
708
703
604
595
3,005
1,457
1,441
1,441
1,417
1,363
1,327
550
4,391
920
917
913
798
793
793
541
3,502
950
950
902
900
892
653
600
2,742
627
627
601
627
542
521
519
11,157
12.N11 : Improvewater quality
e watershed approach, (cumulative)
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014 -2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
target is 575.
WQ-SP13.N11: Ensure that the condition of the Nation's waters does not degrade (i.e., thi
is no statistically significant increase in the percent of waters rated "poor" and no
statistically significant decrease in the waters rated "good").
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2006 BASELINE
National Program Manager Cor
target is maintain or improve ci
ments: In the FY 2014 -2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
iditions. In FY15, EPA will be reporting on the Lakes Survey.
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
xygen, pH, water temperature, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, pathogen indicators, and
- = => ' nulative)
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: Universe includes two numbers: 1,729 - the total
number of monitoring stations identified by tribes that are planned for sampling (for one or
more of seven key parameters) at times during the FY12-15 period; 185 - the number or
monitoring stations (out of the 1,729) that are located on waters that have a potential for
improvement in one or more of seven key parameters. In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic
Plan, the 2018 target is 50 of the 185 monitoring locations to show improvement
WQ-SP14b.Nll: Identify monitoring stations on tribal lands that are showing no degradatioi
in water quality (meaning the waters are meeting tribal water quality objectives).
(cumulative)
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
sure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (Key Performance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Long Term Budget Measure), and I (Indica
) 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).
r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fr
measuretableinthe
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
6
1
4
7
1,729
261
6
1
4
7
1,729
^^^^^^^^^^^H
i
i
n/a
0
160
^B 14
n/a
NT
0
0
14
n/a
n/a
NT
n/a
0
n/a
76
1
NT
1
0
37
2
0
NT
0
0
729
44
n/a
NT
0
0
68
1
n/a
NT
0
0
150
4
n/a
NT
n/a
2
100
10
n/a
NT
0
0
203
43
4
NT
3
5
268
67
National Program Manager Comments:
WQ-24.N11: Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to basii
sanitation in coordination with other federal agencies (cumulative).
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
LT 77,700
75,140
72,700
69,783
63,087
56,875
43,600
360,000
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
target is 91,900. Corresponds with SDW-18: Number of American Indian and Alaska Native
homes provided access to safe drinking water in coordination with other federal agencies.
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.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
UNIVERSE ^^^^^^^B
National Program Manager Comments: New n
on state-provided milestone information.
e in FY 11. The planning target is based
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
WQ-Old
BASELINE
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments:
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2010 COMMITMENT
Y 2005 BASELINE
Y 2013 UNIVERSE
41 41 NT
41 41 n/a
41 41 NT
40 40 n/a
39 39 n/a
38 38 n/a
38 n/a
26 26 0
60 60 n/a
NT 2 5
n/a 2 5
NT 2 5
n/a 2 5
n/a 2 5
n/a 2 5
n/a 2 4
n/a 2 2
n/a 2 5
0 NT
0 n/a
0 NT
0 n/a
0 n/a
0 n/a
0 n/a
0
1 n/a
8 11
8 11
8 11
8 10
8 10
8 10
8 10
3 8
21 14
National Program Manager Comments: Universe reflects all federally recognized Tribes who
have applied for "treatment in the same manner as a state" (TAS) to administer the water
quality standards program (as of September 2007).
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 pi
standards.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT 29 29
Y 2014 COMMITMENT 37 34
66.1% 60.7%
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT 32 32
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT 39 39
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT 39 39
Y 2005 BASELINE 37 37
UNIVERSE 56 56
National Program Manager Comments: FY05 baseline are end of year results from the WATA
database.
3
2
; 3
2
3
3
2
4
2
3
3
3
2
3
4
03b: Number, and national percent of tribes that within the preceding three year perio
bmitted new or revised water quality criteria acceptable to EPA that reflect new scientific
formation from EPA or other resources not considered in the previous standards.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
Y 2013 UNIVERSE
7(18.4%)
24%
9 (23.7%)
9
14(38%)
13
12 (40%)
38
7(18.4%)
9
9
9
14
13
12
38
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a n
0
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
a n/a
n/a
1 1
2 0
2 NT
3 n/a
3 1
3 1
1 5
5 10
NT N
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
0
T 2 1
3 0
3 NT
3 0
3 3
4 2
0 3
8 9
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: The universe for FY11 and FY12 percentages for WQ-
3b is the number of authorized tribes that have at least initial EPA approved water quality
standards as of September 2010.
WQ-I
9nrli
3-04a: Percentage of submissions of new or revised water quality standards from states
and territories that are approved by EPA.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
89.6%
79.2%
59.5%
50%
63.1%
87.5%
100%
91.5%
National Program Manager Comments: Based on submissions received in the 12 month
period ending April 30 of the fiscal year. Partial approvals receive fractional credit. Universe
is not applicable because it changes annually based on number of water quality standards
submissions. Measure deleted from the FY 2015 budget.
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)
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: A cumulative measure that co
developed, submitted to the region, and begun implementing water m
that are consistent with the EPA 106 Tribal Guidance.
nts tribes that have
nitoring strategies
WQ-09a: Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of nitrogi
waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: FY05 baseline for
results are received mid-February of the following year.
WQ-09b: Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of phosphorus from nonpoint
to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: FY05 baseline foi
results are received mid-February of the following year.
WQ-09c: Estimated annual reduction in million tons of sediment fro
waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: FY05 baseline for ;
results are received mid-February of the following year.
inth period only. End of ye:
WQ-10: Number of waterbodies identified by states (in 1998/2000 or subsequent years)
being primarily nonpoint source (NPS)-impaired that are partially or fully restored.
(cumulative)
Y2015 COMMITMENT LT 600
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT 560
Y 2014 COMMITMENT 562
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT 504
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT 433
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT 358
Y 2005 BASELINE 15
94 3
60 3
62 3
04 3
33 2
58 2
5 1
1 70 95
0 67 89
1 66 85
8 62 82
7 54 71
5 49 57
025
86
81
86
58
39
26
0
37 20
33 17
33 20
30 17
24 16
20 14
0 0
19
17
15
12
10
05
0
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (Key P
the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/ or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/ commitm
rformance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lon
nt (or target/commitment at 0).
m Budget Measure), a
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fr
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: Regions report results. The universe is the estimated
waterbodies impaired primarily by nonpoint sources from the 1998 (or 2000 if states did not
have a 1998 list) 303(d) lists. Note that this universe shifts each time a new 303(d) list is
developed, so this figure is only an estimate. Only waters on the Success Story website
(epa.gov/owow/nps/Success319/) are counted.
WQ -11: Number, and national percent, of follow-up actions that are completed by assessed
NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) programs, (cumulative)
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: Regional annual commitments and completed NPDES
Action Items are confirmed by the HQ Action Items database. Assessed programs include 45
WQ-12a: Percent of non-tribal facilities covered by NPDES permits that are
current.
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and report results in both % and #.',
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program M
both percent
itments, and results will be reported in
12b: Percent of tribal facilities covered by NPDES permits that are considered current.
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and report results in both % and #.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
sure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (Key P
) 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/ commitm
rformance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Long Ter
nt (or target/commitment at 0).
i Budget Measure), and I (Indicator Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fr
measuretableinthe
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: Targets, commitments, and results will be reported in
both percent and number. This measure includes facilities covered by all permits, includii
WQ-13a: Number of MS-4s covered under either an individual or general permit.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: The Universe is n/a .The end of year results a
to develop the universe of facilities covered under a MS-4.
WQ-13b: Number of facilities
water permit.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
93,042
94,447
87,060
84,718
86,826
3,792
3,571
3,599
3,553
4,620 6,401
4,001 6,653
4,614 6,566
4,651 6,621
18,522 18,003
18,234 18,034
16,111 17,763
19,091 20,508
21,186
13,922
6,821
6,257
4,313 1,991
4,313 1,886
4,555
4,678
4,096
3,916
National Program Manager Comments: The Universe is n/a .The end of year results are used
to develop the universe of facilities covered under either an inidividual or general inudstrial
WQ-13c: Number of sites covered under either an individual or general
water site permit.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESUI
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: The Universe is n/a .The end of year results
to develop the universe of facilities covered under either either an inidividual or general
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
6,946
6,684
7,581
7,994
8,623
19,653
9
9
7
7
0
33
241
550
563
566
624
632
894
686
457
444
175
770
881
1,042
1,042
863
2,131
3,621
1,956
1,894
1,824
2,234
1,488
3,204
588
589
741
794
1,391
4,190
968
514
1,521
1,521
1,239
3,777
706
673
673
680
448
841
172
173
190
198
296
1,670
531
554
563
687
831
915
National Program Manager Comments: FY05 CAFO data is not from ACS. Note: It is likely the
regions overestimated the number of CAFOs covered bv a general permit in 2005.
WQ-14a: Number, and national percent, of Significant Industrial Users (SlUs) that are
discharging to POTWs with Pretreatment Programs that have control mechanisms in pi;
that implement applicable pretreatment standards and requii
FY2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Coi
from year to year.
nents: All universe numbers are approximate as they shift
WQ-14b: Number, and national percent, of Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs) that
discharging to POTWs without Pretreatment Programs that have control mechanisms in pi;
that implement applicable pretreatment standards and requii
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
20,664
98.8%
20,734
20,647
98.2%
20,733
20,977
22,013
20,915
20,664
98.8%
20,734
20,647
98.2%
98.2%
99.3%
96%
20,915
1,320
98.4%
1,316
1,341
1,341
1,301
1,363
1,341
1,522
97.3%
1,538
1,555
1,571
1,617
2,110
1,581
98.0%
1,585
1,583
1,613
1,662
1,723
1,614
3,565
100.0%
3,563
3,475
3,461
3,467
3,418
4,386
00.0%
,337
,383
,366
,524
,265
,386
1,878
97.0%
1,937
1,898
1,976
1,972
2,132
1,937
946
98.0%
964
946
1,000
983
829
965
647
98.3%
647
647
647
647
592
658
4,149
8.5%
,149
,149
,088
,137
,019
,214
670
100.0%
698
670
670
667
562
670
National Program Manager Coi
from year to year.
nents: All universe numbers are approximate as they shift
WQ-17: Fund utilization rate [cumulative loan agreement dollars to the cu
available for projects] for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
BUD
ARRA
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE (in billions)
94.5% 94.5%
98.0%
94.5%
97.0%
98%
98%
94.7%
$97.5
94.0%
98.0%
93.4%
97.0%
98%
98%
94.7%
$97.5
92.0%
104.0%
92.0%
106%
94%
104%
110%
$9.2
90.0%
95.0%
90.0%
92%
93%
95%
94%
$18.3
94.5%
95.0%
94.5%
94%
96%
95%
89%
$8.4
94.5%
97.0%
90.0%
97%
94%
99%
95%
$12.1
95.0%
98.0%
95.0%
97%
99%
97%
98%
$20.9
94.0%
95.0%
95.0%
94%
94%
95%
91%
$9.0
93.0%
94.0%
90.0%
96%
93%
98%
88%
$5.5
94.0%
91.0%
94.0%
90%
88%
96%
91%
$3.2
95.0%
107.0%
95.0%
107%
111%
107%
93%
$7.9
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
97%
104%
103%
98%
$3.0
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: Universe represents the cumulaitve funds available
ijects for the CWSRF. in billions of dollars (i.e.. the denominator of the
fcr
WQ-19a: Number of high priority state NPDES permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2015 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: Starting in FY13, results can no longer exceed 100%
issuance due to a refinement of the measure definition, and the target was revised
WQ-19b: Number of high priority state and EPA (including tribal) NPDES permits that
issued in the fiscal year.
Y2015 COMMITMENT 80% 526 526 34 3
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT 556 556 34 2
Y 2014 COMMITMENT 532 532 31 2
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT 1,005 1,005 50 5
Y 2011 COMMITMENT 763 763 29 3
Y 2015 UNIVERSE 674 674 57 3
82 62 66 23
57 67 69 25
69 65 60 21
^^^^B 79 102 9
142 126 196 97
158 158 161 86
169 80 93 59
108 78 83 28
30
75
63
64
38
61
21
40
7
2
1
6
8
9
9
7
5
I
0
2
2
3
2
0
8
6
4
National Program Manager Comments: Starting in FY13, results can no longer exceed 100%
issuance due to a refinement of the measure definition, and the target was revised
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
National Program M
of serviceable h
WQ-25a: Num
community.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
sure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (Key P
) 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/commitm
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), and I (Indicator Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is from 8-year perforn
measure table in the
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
BASELINE
National Program Mi
to be funded in total
nents: Of the targeted 30 projects initiated, 10 are expected
s Urban Waters Small Grants, grants made directly to grant reel pi
WQ-25b: Number of ui
mpleted addressing water quality issues in the
FY2015 COMMITMENT
BASELINE
National Program Mai
Included in the FY 2015 targ.
lents: Measure reestablished in the FY 2015 budget.
to the UW Small Grants awarded by EPA,
grants
itified by each state that are addressed by EPA-approved
alternative restoration approaches for impaired waters that will achieve water
(uality standards. These areas may also include protection approaches for unimpaired
waters to maintain water quality standards.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
BASELINE
UNIVERSE
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
National Program Manager Comments: Regional targets is delayed (marked as NT) until the
WQ-28: State-wide extent of activities leading to completed TMDLs or alternative restoratio
BASELINE
UNIVERSE
TBD
TBD
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY15.
WQ-29: Number of states protecting or improving water quality conditions, as denn
by state-scale statistical surveys:
On average, water quality is improving or at least not degrading (there is
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.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments:
30: Number of WaterSense partners working to improve water use efficiency
BASELINE/FY2014 Cumulative
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments:
WQ-31: Number of water and wastewater utilities that use the EnergyStar Portfolio Man;
to manage energy.
WQ-32: Number of water and wastewater utilities that have registered to use the Climate
Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool (CREAT).
33: Number of CWSRFs/DWSRFs that used financial incentives to promote climate
lience projects in the last year.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: A "climate resilience project" is an infrastructu
a utilitv or system's continuit
ove Coastal and Ocean Wate
Nil: Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will have achieved
entalhy acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan and
through on-site monitoring programs).
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
2012 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager C
target is 95%.
ents: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
CO-02: Total coastal and non-coastal statutory squ
"no discharge zone(s)." (cumulative)
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: As of FY10, the universe consists of the total area of
water eligible to be designated as an NDZ under the current regulations (in statutory square
CO-04: Dollar value of "primary" leveraged
Directors and/or staff in millions of dollars
irces (cash or in-kind) obtained by the NEP
ded to the nearest tenth of a percent.
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: (Dollars in millions). Note that "primary" leveraged
dollars are those the National Estuary Program (NEP) played the central role in obtaining. An
CO-06: Number of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that
reporting year.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
2012 UNIVERSE
CO-432.N11: Working with partners, protect or restore additional acres of habitat within th
study areas for the 28 estuaries that are part of the National Estuary Program (NEP).
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
100,000 100,000
93,557
100,000
127,594
114,579
449,241
39,637
93,557
38,649
127,594
114,575
449,241
1,414.5
5,497
2,894
2,290.2
3,589.0
14,562
1,250
4,121
1,250
791.1
3,017.0
15,009
3,500
2,469
3,500
11,926.4
4,726.0
33,793
25,000
56,886
25,000
68,234.0
52,801.0
232,605
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
3,000
6,632
3,000
6,559.9
8,776.0
54,378
NT
n/a
NT
n/a
n/a
n/a
NT 500
n/a 6,026
NT 500
n/a 30,226.2
n/a 30,438.0
n/a 82,363
4,972
11,926
2,505
7,566.2
11,228.0
16,531
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
target is 600,000. The FY15 national target is higher than the regional aggregates because the
WT-SP22: In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states, and tribes, aehi
net loss' of wetlands each year under the Clean Water Act Section 404 regulatory progi
("No net loss" of wetlands is based on requirements for mitigation in CWA404 permits
nottheactual mitigation attained.)
Subobjective 2.2.3 Increase Wetl
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESUL
National Program Manager C
Reeulatorv Pros
ents: Data source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ORM2
ote that there is a data lae with this measure. Reports
WT-01: Number of acres restored and improved, under the 5-Star, NEP, 319, and great
waterbody programs (cumulative).
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
FY 2006 BASELINE
5 Star Restoration Grants. National Estuarv Program. Section 319 grants. Brown fields grants.
WT-02a: Number of states/tribes that have substantially built or increased capacity in
wetland regulation, monitoring and assessment, water quality standards, and/or restorati
and protection. (Annual)
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: Intended to allow us to track work of all states/tribes
(those iust starting to build wetland programs and those that are improving well developed
WT-03: 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.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Con
will appear in FY11. Reported o
ments: Tracking capabilities began in 1/2010. Tracking totals
i by Regions and HQ.
Subobjective 2.2.4 The Great Lakes
GL-SP31: Areas of Concern where
implemented (cumulative).
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 201:
rget is 12 AOCs. This measure identifies the cumulative target for taking all n
«
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
sure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (Key Performance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (LongTer
) 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).
i Budget Measure), and I (Indicator Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is from 8-year perforn
measure table in the
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Mai
GL-07: Number GLRI-funded Great Lakes rapid responses
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 BASELINE
National Program Mi
established.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: Measure text revised in FY 2015 to clarify that the
focus of the measure included aquatic and terrestrial acres. Results from this measure also
GL-17: Projected phosphorus reductions from GLRI-funded projects in targeted watersheds
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2015 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY 2015. Cumulative
lire of average annual projected reduction, starting in FY 2015.
GL-18: Projected volume of untreated urban runoff captured or treated by GLRI-funded
:s (cumulative, measured in millions of gallons).
projects (c
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measure table in the
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY 2015. Cumulative
lire of average annual projected reduction, starting in FY 2015.
GL-19: Number of miles of Great Lakes tributaries reopened by GLRI-funded projects
(cumulative).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY 2015.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2015 BASELINE
National Program Mai
GL-21: Number of acres of Great Lakes coastal wetlands protected, restored, and enhanced
by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2015 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
7,000
7,000
0
260,000
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY 2015.
GL-22: Number of acres of other habitats in the Great Lakes basin protected, restored, and
enhanced by GLRI-funded projects (cumulative).
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2015 BASELINE
127,000
117,000
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY 2015.
Subobjective 2.2.5 Tlie Chesapeake Bay
CB-05.N14: Percent attainment of water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, water
clarity/underwater grasses, and chlorophyll a in Chesapeake Bay and tidal tributaries.
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY15. In the FY 2014-2018
EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018 target is 45%.
CB-SP35: 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.
CB-SP35 OMB 45'°%
Y2015 COMMITMENT 37.5%
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2010 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: FY 2015 target is based on a straightline trajectory to
achieve 60% by FY 2018.
52.5%
37.5%
27.0%
30.0%
25.0%
21%
8%
0%
52.5%
^1 ^^^^^^^^H ^^^^^H 1 37.5%
27.0%
30.0%
25.0%
21%
8%
0%
^^^^^l^^^^^^l^^^^^^l^^^^^^l
^^^^^l^^^^^^l^^^^^^l^^^^^^l
^^^^^l^^^^^^l^^^^^^l^^^^^^l
CB-SP36: Percent of goal achieved for implementing phosphorus pollution reduction
to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2010 BASELINE
National Program Man a
achieve 60% bvFY 2018.
CB-SP37: Percent of goal achieved for implementing sediment pollution redu
achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
CB-SP37
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Guid;
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: FY 2015 target is based on a straightline trajectory to
achieve 60% by FY 2018.
Subobjective 2.2.6 The Gulf of Mexii
GM-SP39: Protect, enhance, or restore coastal and upland habitats within the Gulf of Mexii
watershed.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Co
flats, oyster beds, sea grasses, i
ments: Coastal habitat includes marshes, wetlands, tidal
m groves, dunes and maritime forest ridee areas.
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.
National Program Manager Comments:
GM-02: Promote and support environmental education and outreach to the inhabitants of
the Gulf of Mexico watershed.
National Program Manager Comments:
GM-03: Support the assessment, development and implementation of programs, projects and
tools which strengthen community resilience.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
National Program Manager Comments:
Subobjective 2.2.7 Long Island Sound
LI-SP41: Percent of goal achieved in reducing trade-equalized (TE) point source nitrogei
discharges to Long Island Sound from the 1999 baseline of 59,146 TE Ibs/day.
Y2015 COMMITMENT
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 COMMITMENT
Y 1999 BASELINE
91.5% 91.5%
94.00%
85.0%
88%
83%
69%
55%
59,146 TE Ibs/day
91.5%
94.00%
85.0%
88%
83%
69%
55%
59,146
National Program Manager Comments: Measure tracked in Trade Equalized (TE) Ibs/day. TE
tounds of nitrogen adjusted bv application of an equivalency factor assigned to
LI-SP42.N11: Reduce the size (square miles) of observed hypoxia (Dissolved Oxygen <3mg/l)
in Long Island Sound.
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
87 sq miles
Long Term
80 sq miles
288.5 sq miles
130 sq miles; 54 days
187 sq miles; 58.6 days
1,400 sq miles (total); 122 days
87 sq miles
LT
80 sq miles
288.5
130; 54
187; 58.6
1,400 sq
miles (total);
122 days
actually
monitored
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
target is to reduce the maximum area of hypoxia by 15%. New measure starting in FY08. Due
LI-SP43: Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the 2010 baseline of 2,975
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2008 BASELINE
1,199 restored & protected
be restored instead of percent of goal achieved. EPA w
easure actual a
lual targets wit
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
LI-SP44: 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 by pa
structures.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2008 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: Measure revised in FY12 to n
be reopened instead of percent of goal achieved. EPA will establish a
Subobjective 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)
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Mi
target is 6,000 acres.
r Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
measures starting in FY08. Baseline is the end-of-year data for
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
43,006
41,006
35,818
30,128
23,818
14,629
4,152
75,000
National Program Manager Coi
of-vear data for FY07.
nents: New measures starting in FY08. Baseline is the end-
Subobjective 2.2.9 U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health
MB-SP23: Loading of biochemical oxygen del
pounds/year) from the U.S.-Mexico Border a
ind (BOD) removed (cii
a since 2003.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); BUD (Budget Measure); SG (State Grant Measure); KPI (KeyP'
i the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, "n/a" is "not available" and/or "not applicable". NT (no target) are measures with no target/commitmi
formance Indicator); ARRA (Recovery Act Measure); LT (Lor
m Budget Measure), ai
>r Measure). FY 2015 Budget Target is fro
measuretableinthe
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2003 BASELINE
nents: Measure first reported in FY10. FYlO's target and
onlv. Starting in FY11. the program will report cumulative
National Program Manager Coi
result represent annual proerei
MB-SP24.N11: Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the U.S.-Mexico
border area that lacked access to safe drinking water in 2003.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2003 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
rget is 75% of homes. Measure is regionally reported starting in FY09. FY03 Baseline: zero
if additional homes provided adequate wastewater sanitation in the
that lacked access to wastewater sanitation in 2003.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2003 UNIVERSE
35,000
8,522
30,355
239,871
5,311
4,500
17,173
National Program Manager Comments: In the FY 2014-2018 EPA Strategic Plan, the 2018
target is 90% of homes. Measure is regionally reported starting in FY09. FY03 Baseline: zero
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.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
sure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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 perforn
) 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).
measure table in the
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
95% AS, 10% CNMI, 80% GU
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY08. AS: American Samoa,
CNMI: Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands. GU: Guam.
Subobjective 2.2.11 The South Florida Ecosystem
SFL-SP45: Achieve 'no net loss' of stony coral cover (mean pel
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) and in the c
and Palm Beach Counties, Florida, working with all stakeholdei
md loc:
it stony coral cover) in the
tal waters of Dade, Browai
i (federal, state, regional.
al, a
cal).
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: New meas
Indicator in FY11. Strategic Plan baseline of 6.7% w
res starting in FY08 and changed to
is revised to 6.8%. The Coral Reef
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.
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments: New measures starting in FY08 and changed to
Indicator in FY11. El = Elemental Indicator; SCI = Species Composition Index.
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 c
equal to 0.20 m-1.
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 1995-2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
75% 75%
86%; 87.2%
75%
84.5%; 80.4%
70.9%; 72.5%
75%; 85.4%
<0.35ug/L (75.7%); sO.ZOm"1
(74.6%)
154
75%
86%; 87.2%
75%
84.5%; 80.4%
70.9%; 72.5%
75%; 85.4%
75.7%; 74.6%
154
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY11. Results reported a
CHLA%;Kd%.
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
SFL-SP47b: At least
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 .
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2014 COMMITMENT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 1995-2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY11. Results reported as
DIN %; TP %.
72.6%; 87.6%
75%
60.0%; 82.3%
81%; 89.5%
84.3%; 73.6%
<0.75 uM (76.3%);
<0.25uM(80.9%)
154
72.6%; 87.6%
75%
60.0%; 82.3%
81%; 89.5%
84.3%; 73.6%
76.3%;
80.9%
154
SFL-1: Increase percentage of sewage treatment facilities and onsite sewage treatment a
disposal systems receiving advanced wastewater treatment or best available technology
recorded by EDU. in Florida Keys two percent (1500 EDUs) annually.
Y 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
Y 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
.2% (55,675)
5% (52,209)
47,505
42,000
32,000
75,000
National Program Manager C
L-2: The number of Everglades Storm water Treatment Areas (STAs) with the annual total
osphorus (TP) outflow less than or the same as the five-year annual average TP outflow,
rking towards the long-term goal of meeting the 10 parts per billion annual geometric
FY2015 COMMITMENT
BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: New measure starting in FY15. "The 5-year baseli
takes into account variability due to climatic conditions including extremely wet or dry y
Subobjective 2.2.12 The Columbia River Basin
CR-SP53: Clean up acres of ki
FY2015 COMMITMENT
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
FY 2015 National Water Program Final Performance Commitments
Italicized ACS code denotes a change in measure text and/or in reporting. Measure categories include: OMB PA (OMB Program Assessment); 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 fro
FY 2016 OMB Submission. 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).
measuretableinthe
FY 2014 COMMITMENT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments: The FY 2013 commitment of 80 acres
However, a 2007 Corps of Engineers, clean-up reported as one acre in 2007, had a 2012
sampling showing that the clean-up failed. Subtracting the one acre brought the net total to
79 acres for FY 2013.
CR-SP54: Demonstrate a reduction in mean concentration of certain contaminants of concer
d in water and fish tissue, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
FY 2014 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2006 BASELINE
Office of Water: FY 2015 National Water Program Giridan
-------
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
Introduction was edited to reflect OW's
current priorities and information was added
to describe the early input process from states
and tribes. In addition, a paragraph was added
on E-enterprise.
Reason for Change
The updated language takes into account input
and necessary updates for FY 2016-2017.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Pages 3-5
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 Infrastructure Area of Focus
was updated to include support for the Build
America Initiative and implementation of the
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
Act fWIFIA").
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
[DWMAPS1.
Recent emergencies and large scale-
contamination events highlighted the need to
improve awareness of risks to drinking water.
Page 16
E-enterprise projects were updated and added.
The updated language takes into account
input and necessary updates for FY 2016-
2017
Page 17-18
Program-
Specific
Guidance
EPA added and updated a number of activities
to the Climate Change section in the Cross-
Cutting Themes section.
In 2016-2017, the Agency is building on
climate policy initiatives that were developed
in FY 2014 and FY 2015.
Pages 23-25
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
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]
Reason for Change
Proposed UCMR4 rule was published in 2015.
Location of New/Modified
Information
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,
alternative restoration and protection
approaches.
The 303(d) Program Vision reflects the
successful collaboration among States and
EPA, which began in August2011.
Pages 45-46
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
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
Page 52
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
(WRRDA- 2014) amendments.
Reason for Change
use, reuse, recapture, and conservation,.
Location of New/Modified
Information
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
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.
Changes added to update Agency's activities
for protection oceans and coastal waters.
Pages 55-56
Under the Increase Wetlands section, the
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
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
Section on the Chesapeake Bay has been
updated to include the new Chesapeake Bay
Watershed Agreement
Reason for Change
Agreement was signed by EPA and its
Chesapeake Bay partners on June 14, 2014.
Location of New/Modified
Information
Pages 62-63
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
Updated activities need to reflect changes in
performance measures.
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 and territories (cumulative, out of a
universe of 280].
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
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
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)
Reason for Change
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].
Location of New/Modified
Information
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
mechanisms in place that implement
applicable pretreatment standards and
requirements.
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
to a number that is out of the control of the
permitting authority that may only reflect a
snapshot at any given time.
Appendix A
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
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
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.
Reason for Change
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.
Location of New/Modified
Information
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 adapting to
changing climate. Added measure will be an
indicator.
Appendix A
Measure added: WQ-31. Number of water
and wastewater utilities that use the
EnergyStar Portfolio Manager to manage
energy.
EPA is proposing program measures related
to progress of water programs in adapting to
changing climate. Added measure will be an
indicator.
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 adapting to
changing climate. Added measure will be an
indicator
Appendix A
Measure added: WQ-33. Number of
CWSRFs/DWSRFs that used financial
incentives to promote climate resilience
projects in the last year.
EPA is proposing program measures related
to progress of water programs in adapting to
changing climate. Added measure will be 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
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
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.
Reason for Change
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.]
Location of New/Modified
Information
Appendix A
Measure modified: GM-SP39. Protect,
enhance, or restore coastal and upland
habitats within the Gulf of Mexico watershed.
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.
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
-------
Change from FY 2015 Addendums and FY 2014 NPM
Guidances
Measure modified: PS-SP51. Protector
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 subobjective
Adding a list of contacts by subobjective
Appendix B
-------
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
Chris Castner
Robin Danesi
John McCarroll
Steve Blackburn
MaryLou Soscia
Paul Amato
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
The Puget Sound
U.S.-Mexico Border
Pacific Island
Territories
South Florida
Ecosystem
Columbia River
Basin
San Francisco Bay
Delta Estuary
(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
(206)553-6517
(202)564-1846
(415)972-3774
(404) 562-9397
(503)326-5873
(415)972-3847
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
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
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State, Interstate, and Tribal Grant Recipients
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. 1, 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 20111. 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 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 III.A.l. of this National Water Program
Guidance.
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. 1., 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:
1 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)"
Office of Water: FY 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance
Page 1 of3
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State, Interstate, and Tribal Grant Recipients
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 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.
Office of Water: F Y 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance Page 2 of 3
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State, Interstate, and Tribal Grant Recipients
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.
Office of Water: F Y 2016-2017 National Water Program Guidance Page 3 of 3
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
A)
EPA 420-R-15-008
www.epa.gov
------- |