FEDERAL SOURCE WATER AGREEMENT
PROGRESS REPORT FEDERAL AGENCY
ASSISTANCE TO STATES AND LOCAL
COMMUNITIES TO PROTECT SOURCES OF
DRINKING WATER MARCH 2000
BACKGROUND
Comprehensive Watershed Framework includes Drinking Water
The Clean Water Action Plan provides a blueprint for a comprehensive watershed framework to attain water
quality restoration and protection priorities. A key component of effectively attaining our end goal of clean
water is to integrate public health and aquatic habitat agendas when address water quality needs. All of the
actions in the Action Plan are guided by the watershed framework principles. For example, the USFS roadless
initiative, the DOI abandoned mine clean up, NOAA Coastal Zone Management ,or EPA's TMDL intiative
should reflect this comprehensive framework and set restoration and protection priorities based on a
combination of criteria including public health and aquatic ecosystem concerns.
Critical to implementing restoration and protection measures under this comprehensive approach is knowing the
locations of the water bodies that supply drinking water to U.S. communities. With the knowledge that states
are currently gathering this data, as requested by Congress as part of the Safe Drinking Water Amendments of
1996, the Federal agencies wanted to show their support in assessing the location and condition of the nation's
drinking water supplies, understanding that the information would be invaluable to building any strong local
watershed framework.
Source Water Agreement Goals
On November 13, 1998, all of the CWAP Federal Partners and the U.S. Postal Service signed an agreement in
support of drinking water source assessment and protection. The goals of the agreement were to:
1.	encourage field offices to continue or begin partnering with states, tribes and local communities to
complete these assessments or to protect local water supplies,
2.	Increase awareness and encourage field offices to use the results of the assessments when developing
relevant watershed management plans.
Federal Agency Commitments
Recognizing that states, tribes and locals are guiding the source water assessment and protection efforts, the
Agencies agreed that the first steps to assisting the source water effort was to make federal resources more
accessible to state, tribal and local source water interests. The actions for 1999 were to:
1.	Improve accessibility to Source Water related data by creating a Federal Source Water-Related Data
Index and updating the Catalog of Federal Funding sources for Watershed Protection with source water
protection related programs.
2.	Facilitate National, Regional and Field Office Planning by informing Federal Regional and Field Offices
and holding Multi-Agency Regional Meetings
3.	Coordinate Drinking Water Source Assessment and Protection Efforts with other related CWAP action
items, by having source water agreement workgroup members make sure that source water goals were
accurately reflected in the implementation of other key actions that they were involved in.

-------
SUMMARY OF SOURCE WATER AGREEMENT PROGRESS
Data and Information Sharing Successes
Considering the starting point of ZERO knowledge about source water among other federal agency leads and a
low awareness even among water quality programs of the importance of drawing in public health interests into
the watershed framework, we have come a long way. In 1999, all nine agencies made their data more readily
accessible to source water managers by creating an index of data sources. Additionally, the Federal Agencies
made information about funding sources more accessible through updating of the Catalog of Funding Sources
for Watershed Protection.
Regional and Field Office Successes
Three key activities took place in 1999 to increase federal awareness and encourage further involvement in
source water issues at the state and local level.
First, National Offices used various means of getting the word to regional offices. All agencies provided
comprehensive lists of regional contacts to EPA for distribution to states and local source water interests. BLM,
USGS and DOE sent copies of the agremeent to their field offices. Some HQ offices developed source water
tools for use by regional and field level offices, such as the Army Environmental Center's Source Water
Protection guide to help water supply operators decide when they need to take protection measures. The US
Forest Service has compiled a literature search of the effects of forestry and grazing practices on drinking water
supplies. Transportation has completed an effort to map unusually sensitive areas to facilitate future planning of
pipeline construction.
Second, many regional Federal Agency offices, particularly Agriculture, Forestry and USGS representatives,
contributed considerable time and technical expertise to shape the state the State source water programs by
participating in state source water technical and citizens advisory committees.
Third, EPA hosted 6 regional level meetings in Nashua, NH, Atlanta, San Francisco, Dallas, Denver and New
York City. One more is scheduled for this spring in Nebraska. The purpose of these meetings was to increase
awareness among the regional federal offices and network state source water coordinators with local feds
involved in water quality projects. Some meetings attempted to identify specific ways that regional federal
programs could assist source water assessment and protection efforts. The information and advice that came out
of these meetings provides insight to what should be the move for the future.
Insights from Regional Multi-Agency State/Federal Agency Meetings
The general awareness of Regional level Federal Agency officials about the CWAP source water agreement or
the linkages between their activities and the impacts on water supplies was low. The initial reactions of federal
agency representatives was to misinterpret this agreement to assist states as an additional reporting burden.
However, despite concerns for resources and responsibility, participants brought to light some on-going
examples of source water protection partnering. These are detailed in attachment ##. In addition to the
examples, here are the most prevalent perceptions of Federal Regional and Field Offices:
1.	"States need to initiate partnerships and avoid duplicative requests for information "
Federal Agencies were willing to share information, but said that it was incumbent upon the states to ask for
information. Several federal agencies perceived this request for data sharing as duplicative. They felt that they
already reported information on source water quality by a different name to the states through current TMDL,
303D and NEPA requirements. It was clarified that there is no national reporting requirement of federal
agencies for source water assessments, but that sharing relevant and readily available water quality data would
help states complete assessments faster.
2.	"Federal actions alone will not solve water quality problems "

-------
Federal agencies expressed concern that any initiative to get federal agencies to implement measures to control
sources of pollution might be a misuse of funds, given that in most watersheds, the water quality depends on
inputs from public and private lands, and local multi-jurisdictional controls. The concern is that the focus is
only on federal agencies, then the end goal of clean and safe water will not be met.
State source water program coordinators are acutely aware of the complexity of the issue and the overwhelming
need for a wide range of actors in each source water protection/watershed protection solution. There is no one
formula or set of stakeholders that will achieve the end goal of lowering the risks of contamination of a given
drinking water source. Everyone agreed that even if federal agencies are managing their facilities and lands with
zero discharge, if the private landowners and cities are not also working on preventing pollution, then it won't
work. This does not preclude federal agencies from providing exemplary stewardship models for the private
industry to replicate.
3. "We are already involved in source water protection"
Some agencies pointed out that they are involved in activities to lower potential threats to water quality to
comply with CWA water quality standards. Several specific exemplary examples of source water protection
were brought forward, either with individual communities or with state source water programs. These examples
reflect a strong sensitivity of regional/field level offices to local community concerns for water quality and
protect water supplies (see Attachment ##).
4 "There is no national directive from my agency to make source water protection a priority or a formal part
of the planning process "
Almost all of the examples sited by the regional offices were projects that they do in spite of, not because of,
national directives or formal planning. No agency brought to light any national policies on protecting sources of
public drinking water supplies that are in critical proximity to federal lands or facilities. Additionally, no one
came forward with an example of regional federal management plans or planning guidelines that detailed how
they conduct business in source water areas at the regional of field office level, or how drinking water supply
issues are incorporated in to their watershed management frameworks.
FEDERAL LAND LINKAGES TO PUBLIC DRINKNIG WATER SUPPLIES
Following up on this last item - lack of naitonal direction - invenstigation of the national policies and budgets
reflects a dearth of attnetion to drinknig water issues. The reasoning behind this has always been that drinking
water protection is a local issues, and is best dealt with at the local level by local federal offices. Yet resources
are often not available to follow through on local priorities. This would be acceptable if there were only pocket
examples where federal agencies. An analysis shows that every federal agency manage significant land holdings
relative to community water supplies.
Forest Service: Over 80% of National Forest lands are in watersheds that serve as a community's water supply -
approximately one third of the nation's community surface water supplies - or 3334 - lie in these watersheds.
Bureau of Land Management: 1219 communities serving a population of 21,030,689 rely on surface water
supplies coming off of BLM-managed lands.
National Park Service: 2004 Surface water systems serving 46,153,010 people This includes Alaska and
Hawaii.
DOD lands - - 4886 water systems in 661 watersheds serving 91,227,807 people
155 of those systems serve 100K +
DOE facilities - 216 systems, 26 watersheds, 3,658,395 people (5 serve 100k +)

-------
DOT - the nation's highway corridors run through ##% of the municipal watersheds
CONCLUSIONS
•	Public health relies in part on the appropriate management of federal lands and facilities Given the extent
of federal lands associated with public water supplies and the disparate efforts at the field level, Federal
Agencies need to strengthen the message coming from national offices about source water protection: low
national priority translates to low regional priority.
•	As states complete more detailed source water assessments, more light will be shone on federal land
management roles in protecting drinking water sources. Proactively planning for this increased attention
is paramount.
•	Resources need to be allocated to all agencies to protect public water supplies.
ATTACHMENT B
SPECIFIC SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PARTNERSHIPS
There is a lot of activity occurring in pockets around the country and across federal agencies. Most are with land
management agencies. Part of the concern is that there are these occasional examples, but there are few national
policies governing how federal agencies are protecting drinking water sources on federal lands and facilities. As
more assessments are completed, and communities become involved in source water protection, federal
agencies should anticipate more questions over what they are doing on their land to protect water quality.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
USD A - FOREST SERVICE
USFS Region 6 and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
The Region 6 U.S. Forest Service staff is working closely with the state to map intakes relative to Forest
Service lands and activities providing clear-cut data, slope stability data, soil types, and road density patterns.
Additionally, the USFS Region 6 staff will provide assistance to the state in delineation of watersheds that
contain a 25% or greater land area managed by the USFS. USFS District Hydrologists will provide assistance in
conducting local source water inventories that include forest service managed areas. The Forest Service has also
agreed to assist in all aspects of the assessments for the 300 water systems owned and operated by the USFS in
Oregon. At the same time they will inventory injection wells, providing an inventory to the State Underground
Injection Control Programs. The main types of injection wells are cesspools/pit toilets, small and large onsite
sewage systems, storm water dry wells, and industrial injection wells associated with their vehicle maintenance
operations.
Finally, the Region 6 Regional Forester sent a letter to all of the Region 6 Forest Supervisors talking about the
importance of working with local communities to protect drinking water supplies.
Mt. Hood National Forest and the Cities of Molalla and Canby
The cities of Canby and Molalla are in Northern Oregon in the Willamette Valley. Both Canby and Mollalla use
surface water from the Molalla River Watershed. Most of the land within the watershed is federally managed by
the Mt. Hood National Forest and Bureau of Land Management, Salem District Office. To protect the quality of
water flowing from the federal lands, the water providers serving Canby and Molalla, the USFS, and BLM
signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU provides a framework for communicating and
coordinating activities within the watershed that may have an impact on water quality. To date, the water
providers are routinely notified by federal and state agencies undertaking construction, clean-up, or clear-cut
activities within the watershed.

-------
USFS Region 5 Office and California
The Forest Service Region 5 Office is conducting source inventories for all Forest Service-operated water
systems in California. The state is providing them with the delineated areas and completing the susceptibility
determination for each Forest Service operated public water supply. The assistance of the Forest Service to
conduct thorough inventories will result in stronger, more useful assessments for use by the Forest Service in
making decisions about facilities or other land uses that might threaten their wells. It also allows California to
spend more time on the #### of other systems in CA that they are responsible for.
Forest Service Large-Scale Watershed Restoration Projects
The USDA's Forest Service fiscal 2000 budget will invest an additional $11.8 million to help restore 12 large
watersheds nationwide. The additional funding supplements about $6.7 million from local Forest Service funds,
and up to an additional $18 million from partner organizations. The total investment in the 12 watershed
restoration projects will be about $36 million in fiscal 2000. The projects demonstrate diversity in project scope
and location. Projects include research and development in New York City's municipal watersheds and the
Chesapeake Bay, to river restoration efforts on the Chattooga, Conasauga, Rio Penasco, Upper Sevier, Upper
South Platte, Warner Mountain/Hackamore, and White River. The Pacific Coastal Watersheds, the Blue
Mountains of Eastern Oregon, and the Lower Mississippi Valley were also selected. Of the twelve projects,
eight have an impact on source water protection - White River, NYC Watershed, Chesapeake Bay, Chatooga,
Conasuaga, Upper S Platte, Blue Mts, and Pacific Coastal. The two with the major impact are NYC and S
Platte.
The New York City Watershed Study is evaluating technology used for absorbing water pollutants in municipal
watersheds and potential markets for forest by-products or waste. Testing and evaluation will occur within the
Catskill/Delaware watershed, which provides almost 90 percent of the New York City water supply.
The Upper South Platte project is designed to restore this Denver metro area watershed following recent
multiple wildfires and flooding. The project will also improve those forested areas in the watershed to reduce
risks from insects, disease, and wildfire.
COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND EXTENSION SERVICE (CSREES)
Rhode Island and RI Extension
As reported at the source water federal roundtable meeting in New Hampshire, the Rhode Island Extension will
help train local officials and citizen volunteers to conduct contaminant source inventories and windshield
surveys as part of the state source water assessment program.
New York and Cornell Extension
Cornell Extension has been actively involved in the state's source water program since the beginning planning
stages. At the forefront in increasing the level of public involvement and public awareness of drinking water
issues, Cornell Extension organized several public forums on source water to increase awareness about source
water assessments and protection in the state of New York.
USD A - NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE
NRCS Erie Country Soil and Water Conservation District and County Cooperative Extension and New
York State. The Conservation District is working with farmers in two high agricultural use watersheds that
serve as public drinking water supplies (18 mile Creek Watershed and Seneca Lake Watersheds), to examine
ground water contamination by pesticides. Using the National Agricultural Pesticide Risk Analysis (NAPRA)
pesticide risk modeling tool, the District wants to help farmers make environmentally sound decisions about
their pesticide applications to minimize risks of water contamination.

-------
NRCS, Idaho Farm Services Agency, and EPA Region 10
NRCS and FSA are developing an MOU with EPA to ensure that animal feeding operations within designated
Sole Source Aquifer areas have nutrient management plans in place that are in compliance with NRCS
guidelines. This is to minimize contamination risk to the sole source aquifers in Idaho that communities depend
upon for their primary source of drinking water.
USD A RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Vermont Rural Development provides grant to the National Rural Water Association who in turn provide
technical assistance to water suppliers, to develop wellhead protection plans.
Mississippi Rural Development. Mississippi Rural Development entered into an agreement with EPA to
ensure that any proposed Rural Development projects within the designated Biscayne Sole Source Aquifer are
designed in such a manner that will prevent the introduction of contaminants into the aquifer in quantities and
concentrations that may create a public health hazard, interfere with public welfare or cause any public water
system tapping the Aquifer to require the installation of additional treatment facilities to meet National drinking
water regulations.
Idaho Rural Development. Idaho Rural Development and EPA signed an MOU that lays out review
procedures for RD-funded projects located within sole source aquifer areas to determine whether they pose a
risk to the ground water.
INTERIOR DEPARTMENT
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
While there is are few resources devoted to protecting water supplies owned and operated by the National Park
Service, the Denver Water Division assists National Parks interested in developing Wellhead Protection Plans.
Some National Parks have partnered with universities to complete assessments as part of class projects. Others,
have been working with states to comply with source water protection requirements. Of all Federal agencies
that operate water supplies, the National Park Service has the most examples of developing wellhead protection
plans. The Denver Office estimates that over 20 Parks have started wellhead protection efforts for their water
systems with limited funding allocations.
Grand Teton National Park Wellhead Protection and Back Country Water Analysis
The NPS worked with Brigham Young University to complete wellhead assessments for the 18 wells operated
by the Park Service. The Park uses the wellhead assessments as a general evaluation tool prior to doing any
activities in the wellhead areas. Also, the Park anticipates using these assessments to meet future state
regulatory requirements. Woodruff Miller BYU 801 378-6331. Bob Schiller 307-739-3481.
Additionally, since 1997, Teton National Park has been collecting Back Country surface water samples for
Fecal Coliform levels. To determine the source of Fecal Coliform detections, they have been doing DNA
signatures in order to distinguish between human coliforms and wildlife coliform. These have become a routine
part of their assessment of back country environmental conditions, and he results have helped to guide
corrective management strategies.
National Parks in Utah. Utah requires that public water suppliers implement wellhead protection plans. Thus
far Capital Reef, Bryce Canyon, Golden Spike, and Zion National Park have completed assessments. Canyon
Lands National Park, Arches National Park, Natural Bridges National Monument have transient drinking water
systems that will be assessed in the coming years, as resources permit.
Yosemite National Park. Through an EPA grant, the National Park Service and DHS have been working
together to develop a source water protection program for the Yosemite National

-------
Park. Thus far, they have delineated the source water protection area within the Yosemite Valley and identified
potential contaminant activities. Practices to decrease the potential for contamination were suggested including
the development of various educational literature such as signage and information on napkins, water bottles, etc.
It is hoped that protection areas will be developed in the future for the other drinking water areas within the
Park.
Big Meadows - Shenendoh National Park (Shenendoah Big Meadows). Shenendoah National Park partnered
with James Madison University students to delineate and inventory wellhead protection areas for the public
wells within the park. Using the information gathered, Park Staff are working to limit the threats in these
wellhead areas by replacing fuel tanks, and raising awareness levels about the placement of tool and pesticide
facilities within the wellhead areas.
The park hopes to strengthen their assessment by combining specific ground water monitoring data being
conducted by USGS as part of a USGS Water Quality Partnership. The USGS has been collaborating with the
Park to conduct ground water fate and transport studies for inorganic chemical compounds and VOCs, the
sources of which are fuels and paint. The monitoring has revealed "yellow" flag amounts (not exceeding MCL
levels) of these compounds in the ground water, probably resulting from leaks from a fuel storage tank or paint
supplies. Part of the study is looking at the length of time that it takes for the ground water to reach surface
water sources, which integrates drinking water protection objectives with concerns for ecosystem health.
Also, the Park is developing a GIS layer for the waters in the Shenendoah National Park., including the riparian
and buffer layers. This includes the mapping the 50 springs on Shen. Park Land and prioritizing areas with
yellow and orange flag concentrations of VOCs. Christy Gordon - Chief of physical 540-999-3499
National Park Service Public Health Program
The Public Health Program developed a tracking system to help individual Parks streamline regulatory
reporting. The data base tracks bacteriological and chemical monitoring data and general data on the water
system (classification, types of sources and types water quality of the drinking water). Currently, they are
upgrading the 10 year-old system for National Park Systems to adopt on a voluntary basis. This data, in
combination with the other extensive water quality data being gathered by the Parks will help beet prioritize
management actions for public health and the environment. Paul Schwarz 209 565 3144.
Cape Cod National Sea Shore and the Cape Cod Commission
The National Park Service partnered with the Cape Cod Commission to complete a study of the ground water
flow and discharge to surface waters. The information is used as a planning tool for evaluating potential water
supply sites on the Cape, as well as understanding the potential flow of contaminants through the ground water
system. Additionally, USGS Massachusetts office completed a study on the upper part of Cape Cod, to identify
the ground water/surface water interaction zones for ponds and rivers. They hope to extend this study to the
lower cape predominantly managed as National Seashore land. The National Park contributes technical and
financial assistance on these collaborative water supply management issues. Tom Camberari 508-362-3828
Compliance Assistance Grant in the Great Lakes Region. EPA Region 5 is working with the National Park
Service to complete assessments for National Park Service Water Systems.
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Mid-Pacific Regional Office and State of California Lake Beryessa Watershed Partnership. The Bureau of
Reclamation, CA DHS, and local county representatives are developing a coordinated approach to water quality
monitoring and contaminant management of Lake Beryessa. The partnership is working on a formal agreement
to develop a water quality monitoring plan that satisfies all of their needs, and identifies specific priority
activities to reduce the risk of contamination reaching the Lake. One agency will take responsibility for
monitoring and assessing the 10 water intakes on the lake, reducing the burden for the other agencies so that
they can focus on pollution prevention strategies.

-------
DOI - BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Training Course for Transient noncommunity Water Systems. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), in
conjunction with EPA Region 8, the State of Utah, and the Bureau of Reclamation, developed and delivered in
May 1999 a course for operators of transient non-community water systems. The course contains valuable
materials intended for operators of TNCWSs.
DOI - USGS
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has for many years been involved in data collection and scientific
investigations related to the quantity and quality of water used for public supplies. Much of this work is
undertaken in cooperation with State and local government agencies. Since the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act
amendments and the initiation of the Clean Water Action Plan in 1997, USGS programs have seen an added
emphasis on source water assessment and protection. During FY 1998 the USGS initiated 8 projects in direct
support of State source water > assessments, and 40 additional projects that generally support the goals of the
assessments. During FY 99, these numbers grew to 15 projects in direct support of source water assessments,
and 70 additional projects, in nearly every State, that generally support the goals of the assessments. These
projects address issues ranging from delineation of source areas for wells and intakes, to sources and occurrence
of specific contaminants in drinking water source areas, to vulnerability analysis of aquifers and streams, to
ground-water age dating, and to assessing the effectiveness of nonpoint-source pollution control measures. The
states with direct source water projects are: Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, New York, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Texas. See
attachment C for specific project summaries.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
U.S. Army Environmental Center has developed a source water protection guide for Defense Installations to use
in completing source water assessments and determining the need for protection measures.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Nothing Reported.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
No examples reported
US POSTAL SERVICE
Beneficial Landscape Design Models. The Postal Services Environmental Program is developing la beneficial
landscape design guide for use by local post offices that protect water sources. The purpose of the guide is to
give landscape architects that are developing design specs for new postal facility site layouts for the facility.
The intended outcome is to reduce pollution, reduce water use , and decrease chances of water quality
degradation. Want to incorporate this in to the specs used on a regular basis for all new facilities.
Chesapeake Bays Grounds Management Plan - As partners in the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the Postal
Service is working to institute practices to minimize impacts on water quality. Currently, the focus is on storm
water management, integrated pest management, and beneficial landscape.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Partnerhip with Alabama Department of Environmental Management
The Tennessee Valley Authority is working in partnership with the Alabama Department of Environmental

-------
Management (ADEM) and some 30 public water supplies to prepare source water assessment information for
surface water intakes on the Tennessee River in Alabama. TVA has contracted with ADEM to provide
watershed delineation, source water protection area delineation and identification of potential pollutant sources.
All information is being entered into a Geographic Information System data base which will be provided to
ADEM. In addition a customized information package is being prepared for each water system to use in
developing their source water protection plan. Some of the reasons for partnering with TVA were its extensive
knowledge on the Tennessee River watershed, its mapping capability and existing data base on potential
contaminant sources.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration, Florida Division
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), EPA and the Florida Department of Transportation signed a
Memorandum of Understanding regarding their role in the protection of the Biscayne Sole Source Aquifer.
FHWA agree that all projects for which an environmental impact state is prepared and or have potential to
contaminate the aquifer will be referred to EPA for review.
MULTI-AGENCY PLACE-BASED EXAMPLES
Big Thompson Watershed Forum - USDA, DOI and EPA
The Big Thompson Watershed Forum (BTWF), sponsored by the North Front Range Water Quality Planning
Association, describes itself as "... a group of concerned people representing private citizens and government
agencies united with the common goal of protection the quality of water throughout the Big Thompson
Watershed." [1998 Annual Report], BTWF has used a $30,000 1998 Regional Geographic Initiative grant from
EPA to design a water quality monitoring network for the Big Thompson Watershed. Other financial support
from federal agencies comes from a USDA CSREES Grant and an EPA Sustainable Development grant. The
United States Bureau of Reclamation is also listed as a financially supporting member. BTWF participants also
include the US Forest Service and the US Geological Survey.
This group has also tried to raise awareness about the importance of protecting the quality of the water
resources in the area because they are local drinking water supplies. BTWF has produced several public
education documents, including a brochure with a map for a self-guided driving tour of the watershed, complete
with stops with larger maps and descriptions of specific water quality issues.
NRCS and the City of Worcester Purer Water Partnership. This collective association of the Worcester
County Conservation District, NRCS, EPA, City of Worcester Dept. of Public Works, state agencies and
watershed associations, offers free informational and referral services to interested land owners and
municipalities, connecting them to various sources and guidance and incentives for stewardship of their
property, including forest management, farm planning, wildlife habitat enhancement, tax reduction, and septic
system upgrades.
Environmental Protection Agency
A big move within EPA has been to improve the coordination between Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking
Water implementation. There has been much verbal commitment, but no one has looked at on the ground
changes that are actually working towards this goal at the regional level.
Looking just within EPA, (not State Programs), here are a few small, yet potentially highly impacting changes
in different regions, to more effectively use CWA tools to be more protective of drinking Water supplies.
Regions 1 and 4 - Source Water and NPDES Permitting Program Changes
The Source Water Programs in both of these regions have worked with Regional NPDES staff to incorporate

-------
boilerplate language about early notification of Water suppliers when a permit is application has been
submitted. This assures more consistent protocol for hearing concerns from Water suppliers that might be
impacted by the permitted facility.
Region 2 Our NPDES staff has criteria that they use to determine whether a facility is a major or minor
pollutant discharger. We have transmitted these criteria to New York State so that they might build them into its
procedure for determining, for the purpose of source water assessments, whether a point source discharger is a
major or minor potential threat to drinking water.
Region 8 - Community Based Protection - Gun Powder Watershed
There are many watershed projects that involve several programs each. Our web page has some examples. For
addressing source water see San Miguel which has been highlighted ad nauseum. TMDLS, NPS, WQ standards,
Source water, storm water, monitoring are CWA programs found in Carol Campbells Ecosystem Protection
Program (EP). NPDES, municipal facilities, drinking water and UIC are in a completely different Office
(division) and we have not developed much of a nexus with them (the Water Program). However, I hope to
work on that in later in the year. We have developed liaisons between my unit (includes the ecosystem
protection team and source water protection team) and the CWA programs in (EP) to improve understanding
and hopefully delivery of CWA/SDWA tools/knowledge to site-specific on the ground community projects. We
told the States that we expect this year's WRASs will address TMDL actions, as appropriate, and source water
issues, as relevant, and will be reviewing them specifically for those elements.
Region 10 - TMDL Review Process routinely includes Source Water staff
ATTACHMENT 3
PROGRESS OF 1999 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ACTIONS
Improve Access to source water related federal agency data
1999 Federal Source Water Related Data Index
Federal Agencies agreed to make relevant Federal information and analyses tools more accessible to state, tribal
and local interests for completing source water assessments. EPA took the lead to compile information from the
federal partners, creating an index of readily accessible data sources searchable by assessment step or agency.
This index also provides regional federal contacts, and is available on the internet at
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/protect/feddata.html.
1999 Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection
Federal Agencies also updated the EPA 1997 Catalog of Federal Funding Sources. In the process of
updating the catalog, increased attention was given to the inclusion of sources relevant to source water
protection, and the relevance of many programs to source water was better described.
2. Facilitate National, Regional and Field Office Planning
Informing Federal Regional and Field Offices
Each agency was responsible for informing their field offices. Most sent out electronic messages to their
regional counterparts. All national offices were diligent on providing regional contact names for regional level
meetings.
Despite the efforts of the national offices, there was still a dearth of information at the regional and field office

-------
level about SWAP.
Regional Multi-Agency State/Federal Agency Meetings
In 1999, EPA hosted 6 regional-level meetings, well attended by all federal agencies (see attachment A). The
goals of the meetings were to increase general awareness among federal entities of how existing, on-going
water quality research, monitoring, data, and management plans may relate to drinking water source assessment
and protection activities, and to encourage field or regional offices of the undersigned agencies to continue with
existing or enter into new partnerships with states, tribes, and local communities.

-------