Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

Summary of Input from State, Territory, and Tribal
Partners for Office of Water's FY 2025-2026 National

Program Guidance

Process for Soliciting Early Input

Name of Organization

Venue

Date

National Tribal Water Council

Feedback Received via a
Virtual Meeting

August 9, 2023

Association of Clean Water
Administrators (ACWA)

Feedback Received via E-mail

September 21, 2023

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Feedback Received via E-mail

September 21, 2023

Association of State Drinking Water
Administrators (ASDWA)

Feedback Received via E-mail

September 28, 2023

National Association of Wetland
Managers (NAWM)

Feedback Received via E-mail

September 29, 2023

Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS)

Feedback Received via E-mail

October 2, 2023

Highlights of Early Input from States, Tribes, and Associations
Comments on Engagement and Outreach

•	EPA should recognize its partnership with states and Tribes by focusing on cooperative
federalism in EPA's FY2025-2026 National Water Program Guidance (NWPG). Transparency and
early collaboration with coregulators is important, especially as the Agency updates rules,
orders, guidance documents, and policies. An effective partnership between states, Tribes and
EPA is not just about who makes decisions, but about how decisions are made, along with a
sense of shared accountability to provide positive environmental and public health results.
States and Tribes need to be included earlier in Agency policy discussions to ensure any
regulation, policy, or guidance is implementable.

•	Early and continued engagement with stakeholders is paramount to assist the Agency. Regularly
scheduled meetings between the Office of Water (OW) leadership, beyond the once-a-year
discussion, would ensure that all parties are working in synch towards the mutual goal of
protecting public health.

1


-------
Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

•	The Agency should outline specific actions within the NWPG that OW will undertake to partner
with states and Tribes.

•	OW should prioritize coordination efforts with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA), other program offices, and regions, outlining specifically how each office
plans to ensure more streamlined communications with states. Joint coordination will be
especially important as OW moves forward with the proposed Lead and Copper Rule
Improvements, National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for Per-and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS), and other regulations. Workgroups, joint trainings, and
regularly scheduled meetings and briefings are all potential avenues to help achieve the goal of
enhanced coordination.

•	The NWPG would be more useful if EPA could outline specific actions that the Agency will take
to have respectful dialogues with public and private sector partners. OW could outline or
schedule standing meetings with partners specifically to discuss implementation concerns. OW
could include co-regulators in agency workgroups or collaborate to develop public
communication and guidance materials.

•	States appreciated the revival of quarterly meetings between the state associations and OW
leadership. These quarterly meetings need to continue. In addition, standing meetings with
state association staff and members of OW leadership would increase the level of collaboration
and partnership between the co-regulators. A standing meeting would allow for a more
consistent and streamlined approach to managing state concerns.

•	States face new challenges as they incorporate climate change, emerging pollutants, changes in
federal water law, and other priority areas into existing regulatory and non-regulatory
processes. EPA should continue to engage with states through the development of improved
guidance materials, training, tools, and other clarifying resources.

•	EPA should engage with stakeholders as the Agency works to implement EPA's 2021 Climate
Adaptation Action Plan. Impacts from climate change can be region-specific and require unique
on-the-ground solutions that states may be better equipped to address.

•	As EPA continues to work to deploy the 29 Environmental Finance Centers (EFCs) throughout
the country, the Agency should engage with state associations and states to ensure that the
EFCs are filling existing technical assistance gaps. Coordination between states and these EFCs
has been minimal to date. States continue to be concerned that, without proper coordination,
these EFCs will unknowingly be duplicating efforts that have already been in place with existing
technical assistance providers.

Comments on the Priority Area "Addressing and Mitigating the
Effects of Climate Change"

•	The Agency should first focus on core mission areas and statutory requirements before focusing
on environmental justice and climate issues.

•	Addressing climate change and environmental justice should be an important and critical piece
of the National Program Guidance (NPG). If EPA includes climate change and environmental
justice in the NPG, the Agency should provide regulatory guidance to the states on how to
incorporate these concepts into their state programs.

2


-------
Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

•	EPA should focus on climate change resiliency in the NPG.

•	States and Tribes need additional resources for engagement and funding to support climate
resiliency needs.

Comments on the Priority Area "Monitoring and Remediating PFAS"

•	Successful implementation of EPA's PFAS drinking water regulation will be a significant
undertaking. The Agency should work with stakeholders throughout the entire process of
developing the NPDWR guidance documents. Particularly on:

o regulatory implementation guidance,

o detailed information for water systems on the available PFAS mitigation strategies,
o guidance regarding residual waste handling and disposal,
o information for states to aid in reviewing PFAS mitigation strategies,
o best practices for ensuring the long-term maintenance of each strategy,
o best practices for pilot testing the available best available technologies,
o guidance on simultaneous compliance, and

o funding roadmap targeted at small and disadvantaged communities.

•	Appropriate risk communication is critical for successful implementation of the PFAS regulation.
So far, the materials provided by the Agency have been inadequate. The Agency should
prioritize the development of adequate risk communication tools as it moves forward in
addressing PFAS. The materials communicating risk should also be released in a timely manner.
EPA should strongly consider coordinating with states before any public release or notifications
of PFAS actions as more time will be needed to prepare and handle the increase in public,
media, and water system inquiries.

•	The NPG should consider PFAS source reduction and remediation as priority areas. Stakeholders
need recommendations for difficult to treat pollutants (i.e., salts) and direction/guidance on
PFAS in biosolids.

Comments on the Priority Area "Investing in Water Infrastructure"

•	The Agency should establish waivers for federal requirements such as the Buy America, Build
America Act (BABA), to continue to target infrastructure funding for underserved communities.

•	The BABA requirements make obtaining funding from federal programs, like the Drinking Water
State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), insurmountable for many small systems.

•	There are inconsistencies between the State Revolving Fund programs on which projects qualify
as lead service line replacements. For example, what constitutes as a lead service line under
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding, versus the funding through the traditional
DWSRF funds. EPA should work to ensure consistency and lessen confusion.

•	EPA should update its tools and resources for lead service line replacement. For example, EPA's
Strategies to Achieve Full Lead Service Line Replacement was released in 2019. The amount of
knowledge developed by the water sector has increased significantly over the past four years.

•	Despite great potential for wetlands to further contribute to effective and resilient
infrastructure, the EPA wetland programs have not benefited from Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act funding that has been made available to traditional clean water programs designed

3


-------
Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

to build, maintain, and operate water treatment plants. EPA should elevate the important role
that wetlands play as a solution for clean water and hazard mitigation. Wetlands are an equally
important partner and solution for our Nation's crumbling infrastructure.

Comments on the Priority Area "Protecting and Restoring
Waterbodies and Watersheds"

•	The Agency should adapt a holistic approach to prevent contaminants from entering the
environment and drinking water sources. Throughout a chemical's lifecycle, from manufacturing
to disposal, it is much more effective and less expensive to remove a contaminate before it
enters the environment.

•	EPA should continue to focus on actions to protect and improve water quality, including giving
greater recognition to the role of wetland protection and restoration. The Agency should update
the permit implementation guidance and provide technical support for implementing the water
quality standards guidance and criteria in permits. An EPA commitment to updating EPA permit
implementation procedures alongside the development of new and revised water quality
standards is warranted and needed.

•	The Agency should include wetland restoration as an approved activity in other Clean Water Act
(CWA) programs. Some CWA programs include wetland restoration as an approved activity, but
not all. This should be reviewed and changed.

•	OW should eliminate the competitive structure of the Wetland Program Development Grant.
This would increase funding for state and Tribal wetland programs.

•	The Agency should include nutrient reduction - especially nitrogen and implementing
sulfate/wild rice water quality standard as priority areas.

Comments on Metrics

•	EPA should work with state agencies to investigate why water systems have remained out of
compliance with health-based standards. When systems are out of compliance for extended
periods of time, they will likely require a unique, non-traditional solution to bring the system
back into compliance.

•	The Agency should provide an opportunity to provide input on potential Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law and environmental justice metrics if these metrics are still being developed.

•	EPA should continue to focus on reducing the backlog of primacy packages as a priority activity
for Public Water Supply Supervision (PWSS) grantees. This problem is at both the state and EPA
levels. Some states have submitted primacy packages to EPA and have had to wait three or
more years for the package to be approved. EPA should work with states to identify and
implement process improvements.

•	Some states report violations to EPA beyond the minimum reporting standards, such as a
significant deficiency discovered at a system or the lack of a certified operator. These
differences cause states that do increased reporting to appear to have a higher number of
violations than a state that does not. EPA should complete a re-baselining of state reporting of
violations to ensure the strategic measure is accurate and consistent.

4


-------
Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

•	The Agency should include in the NWPG all the tribal metrics that were removed in the FY2020
- FY 2021 National Water Program Guidance.

•	Under the Evidence Act Grant Commitments Learning Agenda, EPA has taken steps toward a
better understanding of current grant reporting and tracking processes across EPA. EPA is
encouraged to take a holistic approach to data collection, considering potential new information
needed alongside what reporting may no longer be needed, what information is not being
utilized that could stop being collected, and what information may already be collected that
could be shared more broadly so that states are not reporting information more than once.
Collection, review, reporting, and management of data incurs costs to both states and EPA so
conducting a complete review of needed and under-utilized information will allow resources to
be better directed where they may be most effective. This review should also include expanded
ability for information available in one system to more readily be available through and to other
systems. Future data modernization efforts should include this holistic approach to data access
to further reduce duplicate data entry and increase data transparency. States have worked
closely with EPA and Tribes in conversations about reinvigorating the Exchange Network. States
encourage continued engagement and continued momentum for these conversations through
the E-Enterprise Leadership Council (EELC).

Comments on Prioritizing Programmatic Needs

•	One of the most pressing challenges state and Tribal drinking water programs continue to face is
prioritizing competing programmatic needs without increased funding for the programs. The
current approach by EPA to continue to add regulatory and non-regulatory requirements
without additional resources and without guidance on disinvesting in lower-priority issues is not
sustainable. States are at a critical point in which they must disinvest in lower-priority activities
or risk significant public health impacts, burnout, and/or loss of staff. OW, OECA, and regions
should work together with states and Tribes to identify program areas that could be de-
emphasized. These priorities may have regional variations and should reflect local concerns in
the states and regions. Stakeholders are willing to work with EPA to do that if there is a strong
commitment for success from EPA. Tackling this problem is not simple, but, collectively, the co-
regulators can no longer ignore this issue as the addition of new responsibilities continues to
exacerbate the problem and put drinking water programs and public health at risk.

•	EPA should acknowledge that state and Tribal programs have significantly increasing workloads
and recognize successes states have already achieved in reducing non-compliance. The current
approach by the Agency to continue to add regulatory and non-regulatory requirements without
additional resources and without guidance on disinvesting in lower-priority issues is not
sustainable.

•	State agencies manage a diverse array of environmental challenges. Flexibility in funding,
planning processes, regulatory actions, and Agency guidance allows states to determine the
most effective ways to meet national standards while accommodating social, geographic, and
economic factors that may be jurisdictional^ specific. EPA should maximize flexibility for states
and Tribes to use federal grants for the highest priority needs in their areas. EPA should also
work closely with states and Tribes to adjust resources to meet changing priorities,
collaboratively resolve planning issues, and provide flexibility in developing work plans.

5


-------
Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

Comments on Technical and Financial Assistance for States and Local
Regulators

•	Funding for PWSS and EPA programs must be increased. In FY 2020 appropriation funding for
the PWSS program increased by 4.2 percent; however, the total funding gap for states' drinking
water programs has increased by $197 million since 2011. Without adequate funding from EPA,
states are finding it increasingly difficult to protect public health through drinking water
programs.

•	States are the primary implementers and enforcers of the nation's environmental laws and
programs are under severe strain with high staffing vacancies and insufficient funding to meet
our shared goals for protecting human health and the environment. EPA should use every
opportunity to support increased federal funding through Categorical Grants, including allowing
funding flexibility such as offered through Performance Partnership Grants, EPA's E-Enterprise
Workload Trade-Offs, and other mechanisms, to carry out delegated/authorized/primacy
federal programs.

•	Programs under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act lean on
many of the same oversubscribed resources and staff that EPA's stakeholder rely on to meet
existing and ongoing requirements. States and Tribes require substantial budget increases to
ensure that they can continue to fulfill their current responsibilities while also assuming
obligations for new high-priority programs.

•	To streamline annual grant workplan development, states recommend EPA support
establishment of electronic collaborative forums between regions and states that can be used to
develop and negotiate grant workplans. States in regions that utilize online collaboration
platforms for Performance Partnership Agreement and Performance Partnership Grant
workplan negotiations have spoken very highly of them. States hope that online collaboration
platforms such as the ones used by EPA Regions 1, 5, and 8 become an option for all states.

•	As EPA continues to implement the Drinking Water - State, Federal, Tribal Information Exchange
System (DW-SFTIES), EPA should provide adequate funding to state agencies to support the
transition to the new system.

•	EPA should look to create a new funding mechanism, like CWA §106 or §319, to support the
wetland program implementation and for administering the dredge/fill permitting program, if
approved under 404(g). This could potentially be accomplished through a formula-based block
grant that would allow all states and Tribes to support their wetland programs based on their
current and evolving needs.

Comments on the Format and Purpose of the Document

•	States need additional information on how the NPGs are used.

•	EPA should also seriously consider comments and recommendations that come directly from
individual states, interstates, and territories, as well as comments from other state associations
that comment on water policy.

6


-------
Document Number: 800S23001

Date: November 2023

Next Steps

The Office of Water and EPA regions will consider the early input received from state, territory, and
tribal partners in developing the FY 2025-2026 National Water Program Guidance.

7


-------