Fiscal Year 2014
National
Water
Program
Guidance
Office of Water
June 2013
&EPA
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 3
II. National Water Program Areas of Focus Guidance 5
A. Protecting Populations at Risk 5
1. Children's Health 5
2. Environmental Justice 5
B. Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality 8
C. Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and Infrastructure 9
D. Controlling Nutrient Pollution 13
E. Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information 15
III. National Water Program (Subobjective) Specific Guidance 18
A. Cross-Cutting Themes 18
1. National Water Program and Tribes 18
2. Protecting Urban Waters 20
3. Climate Change 21
4. Implementing Innovative Technology in Water 22
5. Grants Management 23
B. Strategies to Protect Public Health 26
1. Water Safe to Drink 26
2. Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat 35
3. Water Safe for Swimming 36
C. Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands 38
1. Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 38
2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters 51
3. Increase Wetlands 54
D. Strategies to Protect and Restore the Health of Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems 56
1. The Great Lakes 56
2. The Chesapeake Bay 58
3. The Gulf of Mexico 60
4. Long Island Sound 62
5. The Puget Sound 63
6. U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health 65
7. Pacific Island Territories 66
Office of Water Page 1 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
8. The South Florida Ecosystem 66
9. The Columbia River Basin 69
10. The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 70
Appendices
A. FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
B. Key Contacts
C. Explanation of Key Changes Summary
D. Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106 State and Interstate Grant Recipients
Office of Water Page 2 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
I. Introduction
This National Water Program Guidance (Guidance) for fiscal year (FY) 2014 describes how the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), states, territories, and tribal governments will work together to
protect and improve the quality of the Nation's waters, including wetlands, and ensure safe drinking
water. Within EPA, the Office of Water (OW) oversees the delivery of the national water programs,
while the regional offices work with states, tribes, territories, and others to implement these programs
and other supporting efforts. In drafting this Guidance, OW recognizes that the federal budget is
shrinking and that states, tribes, territories, and municipalities may be experiencing budget shortfall due
to a slowly recovering economy. In this environment, it is important for EPA to work with partners to
focus resources on the highest priorities and find the most efficient path towards achieving clean and
safe water goals.
Section II, National Areas of Focus Guidance, describes priority program areas for FY 2014. EPA, states,
and tribes need to give special attention to these national priority areas to ensure safe and clean water
for all Americans. In doing so, OW recognizes that EPA regional offices, states, and tribes need flexibility
in determining the best allocation of resources for achieving clean water goals and safe drinking water
at the regional, state, and tribal level.
Section III, Program Specific Guidance, describes the key actions needed to accomplish the public health
and environmental goals in the EPA Strategic Plan1. The Strategic Plan addresses water programs in Goal
2, Protecting America's Waters. In Goal 2, two key objectives, Protect Human Health and Protect and
Restore Watersheds and Aquatic Ecosystems, are supported by subobjectives that define specific
environmental or public health results to be accomplished by the National Water Program. This
Guidance is organized into 15 subobjectives2 and cross-cutting water themes to describe the increment
of environmental progress that EPA hopes to make in FY 2014 and the program strategies to be used to
accomplish these objectives. In the Guidance, these subobjectives are organized into three areas:
• Protect human health by improving the quality of drinking water, making fish and shellfish safer to
eat, and assuring that recreational waters are safe for swimming;
• Protect and restore the quality of the Nation's fresh waters, coastal waters, and wetlands; and
• Protect and restore the health of large aquatic ecosystems across the country.
Appendix A includes a comprehensive list of performance measures that support the subobjective
strategies and are used to manage water programs. More detailed measure information, including
definition and methodology, will be available online3 as supplemental information to this Guidance.
Three types of performance measures include:
• "Outcome" Strategic Target Measures: Measures of environmental or public health impacts (i.e.
outcomes) are described in the EPA Strategic Plan with long-range targets and in this Guidance.
• National Program Activity Measures (PAMs): Core water PAMs (i.e., output measures) address
activities to be implemented by EPA and by states/tribes that administer national programs. They
are the basis for monitoring progress in implementing programs to accomplish the environmental
goals in the Agency Strategic Plan. Some of these measures have national and regional "targets" for
1 The EPA Strategic Plan is currently being updated for FY 2014-2018 and will be available in February 2014 at the
following website: http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan.
2 The Guidance also contains one additional section covering the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary.
3
Supplemental information to the Guidance is at http://water.epa.gov/resourcejerformance/planning/FY-2014-
National-Water-Program-Guidance.cfm
Office of Water Page 3 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
FY 2014 that serve as a point of reference as EPA regions work with states/tribes to define more
formal regional "commitments" in the Spring/Summer of 2013.
• Ecosystem Measures: These measures address activities to restore and protect communities and
large aquatic ecosystems and implement other water program priorities in EPA regional offices.
The process for managing water program strategies includes a three part process:
• Part 1 is the development of this Guidance, starting with a review of measures in the fall of 2012, a
draft Guidance by April 2013, and the final Guidance by June 2013.
• Part 2 involves consultation and planning among EPA regions, states, and tribes, to be conducted
during the Spring/Summer 2013, to convert the "targets" in this Guidance into regional
"commitments" that are supported by Performance Partnership Agreements and other grant
workplans with states and tribes. This process allocates available resources to those program
activities that are likely to result in the best progress toward accomplishing water quality and public
health goals given the circumstances and needs in the state/region. The tailored, regional
"commitments" and state/tribal workplans that result from this process define, along with this
Guidance, the "strategy" for the National Water Program for FY 2014.
• Part 3 involves work to be done during FY 2014 to assess progress in program implementation and
improve program performance.
OW will continue to promote effective grants management to improve program performance. The
Agency has issued directives, policies, and guidance to help improve grants management. It is the policy
of OW that all grants are to comply with applicable grants requirements regardless of whether the
program specific guidance document addresses the requirement.
The grant guidances for the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 106 Water Pollution Control, Public Water
System Supervision (PWSS), Underground Injection Control (UIC), and the Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF) programs are incorporated into relevant subobjectives in this Guidance.
The Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Overview4 to the National Program Manager (NPM)
Guidances communicates important agency-wide information and should be reviewed in conjunction
with this Guidance as well as other applicable requirements. The Agency's Overview also includes
important background information and the eleven cross-program areas that are critical to effective
implementation of EPA's environmental programs in FY 2014.
The key contacts for this Guidance are:
• Mike Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water.
• Tim Fontaine, Senior Budget Officer and Director of Resource Management Staff.
• Vinh T. T. Nguyen, Program Planning Team Leader.
Key contacts by subobjective are listed in Appendix B and posted with other related documents at
http://water.epa.gov/resource performance/planning/FY-2014-National-Water-Program-Guidance.cfm.
4 Read the Agency's Overview at: http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fV2014.
Office of Water Page 4 of 70
-------
FY 2014 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 2014 to ensure that children receive water that is safe to drink. There are
approximately 7,700 schools and child care centers that are also public water systems (PWS). Similar to
other small systems, schools and child care centers often do not have the technical, managerial, or
financial (IMF) capacity to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requirements, including
maintaining a certified operator.
Children's Health Activities for FY2014
• States will assist in disseminating user-friendly materials developed by EPA to ensure that these
systems understand their responsibilities to comply with the Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR).5
• States will work, including in partnership with EPA, to ensure that violations occurring at schools and
child care centers are addressed quickly and these systems are returned to compliance.
Children's Health Performance Measures
• Indicator SDW-17 (page 1, Appendix A) tracks schools and child care centers meeting health-based
drinking water standards.
2. Environmental Justice
OW will work to create healthy and sustainable communities, for all people, by decreasing
environmental burdens and increasing environmental benefits. To implement the Agency's
environmental justice (EJ) priority, to expand the conversation on environmentalism and working for EJ,
the EPA adopted Plan EJ 2014s, as its overarching EJ strategy. OW supports this priority by working with
NPMs and regions to mobilize resources to address the needs of disproportionately unserved and
underserved communities through strategies and tools that include: (1) EJSCREEN, (2) EJ Legal Tools, (3)
incorporating EJ in rules, (4) incorporating EJ in permits, and (5) intra- and interagency collaborations to
support community-based work in overburdened communities.
OW places emphasis on achieving results in areas with potential EJ concerns through Water Safe to
Drink (Subobjective 2.1.1) and Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat (Subobjective 2.1.2). In addition, the
National Water Program places emphasis on other EJ Water Related Elements: 1) Sustain and Restore
the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health (Subobjective 2.2.9); 2) Sustain and Restore Pacific Island
Territories (Subobjective 2.2.10); and 3) Alaska Native Village (ANV) Program. This focus will result in
improved environmental quality for all people, including the unserved and underserved subpopulations
living in areas with potential disproportionately high and adverse impacts on human health. OW will
integrate EJ principles into its programmatic and regional decision making through the use of
rulemaking, policy, screening and legal tools.
5 Read more on RTCR at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/tcr/regulation revisions.cfm.
6 Read more on Plan EJ 2014 at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/plan-ej/index.html.
Office of Water Page 5 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Environmental Justice Activities for FY 2014
• 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 and drinking 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.
• OW will continue to develop and track measures that characterize actions taken, or that
characterize environmental or health conditions of overburdened communities/children as outlined
in the FY 2012 Annual Action for the Cross-cutting Strategy for EJ and Children's Health, using
EJSCREEN and other EJ tools as appropriate.
• The Urban Waters Program7 will advance EJ goals through activities such as providing technical
support and funding for place-based projects through the Urban Waters Small Grants program and
through grants funded by EPA; the Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration Program funds managed
by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; support provided by the Urban Waters Federal
Partnership; and development of tools for local action at the community level. The National Water
Program will share both barriers and effective practices for engaging overburdened communities
that are identified through Urban Waters program activities. These lessons learned will be shared
within the National Water Program and with OEJ.
• OW will promote infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged communities through
DWSRF that reduce public exposure to contaminants through compliance with regulations and
support the reliable delivery of safe water by community water systems (CWSs).
• OW will promote infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged communities through the
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) that protect and restore water quality.
• The EPA National Tribal Drinking Water Program8 will continue to maintain its commitment to
improve the provision of safe drinking water in Indian country by working with PWSs to maintain
and improve compliance with the national primary drinking water regulations (NPDWRs) through
use of infrastructure funding, technical assistance, and enforcement actions. EPA will also continue
to work in partnership with the Indian Health Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through the Infrastructure Task Force
(ITF)9 to increase access to safe water, basic sanitation, and solid waste management services. To
support better management and maintenance of water systems in Indian country, EPA will continue
7 Read more on the Urban Waters Program at http://www.epa.gov/urbanwaters/.
8 Read more on tribal program funding at http ://water. epa. gov/aboutow/ogwdw/tribal. cfm#funding.
9 Read more on ITF at http://www.epa.gov/tp/trprograms/infra-water.htm.
Office of Water Page 6 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
to implement the National Tribal Drinking Water Operator Certification program to ensure that
tribal water utility staff have the training and experience needed to provide safe drinking water. In
addition, OW will work with partners to develop a methodology to assess the financial cost burden
to operate and maintain drinking water and clean water infrastructure.
• OW will focus on activities encouraging states to assess fish and shellfish tissue for contaminants in
waters used for fishing by minority and sensitive populations, particularly those that catch fish for
subsistence. Such populations may include women of child bearing age, children, African Americans,
Asian Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, Native American Indians and Alaska Natives, and Native
Hawaiians.
• EPA will continue to prioritize funding to U.S.-Mexico border communities based on the most severe
public health and environmental conditions. These communities are looking to EPA as a last-resort
funding source when utilities, cities, or states are not able to fully finance needed infrastructure
improvements.
• The ANV10 program, through the State of Alaska, will provide grant funds to under-served Native
Alaska communities to improve or to construct drinking water and wastewater facilities thereby
improving local health and sanitation conditions. EPA will provide funding for ANV infrastructure
needs through the clean water and drinking water tribal set-aside programs11. The ANV program is
unique in that it is also authorized to support training and technical assistance programs related to
the technical, managerial, and financial requirements of managing drinking water and sanitation
systems in rural Alaska.
• In the Pacific Island territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI), EPA will continue the strategic use of grants, technical assistance, and
enforcement to improve institutional capacity and infrastructure. Water and sewer service in the
U.S. Pacific Islands has lagged that of the U.S. mainland for decades. More specifically, EPA will use
grants, technical assistance, and enforcement to improve utility engineering and management,
construct better infrastructure, and promote asset management to extend the life of infrastructure,
all with the intent to provide Pacific Islanders with the same quality of water that most of the U.S.
enjoys, and protect Pacific Islanders from undertreated sewage.
• OW will work with Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE)12 communities to assess
and address sources of local water pollution, including the use of water pollution reduction
programs, particularly those communities suffering disproportionately from environmental burdens.
• 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 assess how
many of the projects initiated are in overburdened communities. 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
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
10 Read more on ANV at http://www.epa.gov/alaskanativevillages.
11 Read more on the Tribal Set-Asides Program at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/allotments/tribes.cfm.
12 Read more on CARE at http://www.epa.gov/CARE/.
Office of Water Page 7 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
environmental hazards, and thus, do not present a universal need for EJ. However, the measure
indicates that a greater proportion of the overall population in Indian country lacks access to safe
drinking water and receives drinking water that is not in compliance with all applicable health-based
drinking water standards compared to the U.S. population on the whole. In addition, measure SDW-18-
N.ll tracks the number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to safe drinking
water in coordination with other federal agencies.
Through the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program, underserved communities build and
improve drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. Many households in the communities receive
drinking water or wastewater service for the first time. These first time service connections are tracked
by measures MB-SP24.N11 and MB-SP25.N11 - additional homes served by improvements in water
services.
ANVs are unique populations that often have extreme sanitation difficulties relative to people in the
lower 48 states. Measure WQ-23 tracks the percentage of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to
safe drinking water supply and wastewater disposal. When compared to the national average, ANVs
continue to stand out as under-served populations for both safe drinking water infrastructure and
adequate wastewater treatment. Consequently, these villages experience disproportional exposure to
untreated or under-treated wastewater.
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 promulgated the revision to the 1989 Total Coliform Rule (TCR)13 in January 2013. The purpose of
the 1989 TCR is 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, which are based on recommendations by a federal
advisory committee and the agency's consideration of public comments. The final RTCR14 requires PWSs
that are vulnerable to microbial contamination to identify and correct problems, and establishes criteria
for PWSs to qualify for and stay on reduced monitoring, which could reduce 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 2014, HQ and regional programs will provide outreach and training to states and drinking
water systems to help prepare for successful implementation of RTCR.
Integrated 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,
13 Read more on TCR at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/tc^asicinformation.cfm.
14 Read more on RTCR at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/nilesregs/sdwa/tcr/regulation revisions.cfm.
Office of Water Page 8 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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.
Central to this goal are two processes that were launched in FY 2012 and are expected to be fully
implemented in FY 2013: transitioning OW's Permit Quality Review (PQR) process from headquarters to
regional offices and integrating the PQR process with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA)'s State Review Framework (SRF) process. In FY 2012, OW assisted regions in leading
PQRs for several states and collaborated with OECA to carry out several integrated PQR-SRF reviews. In
FY 2013, EPA regions (with headquarters assistance as requested) will conduct a number of state
program reviews and regions will integrate the PQR and SRF processes into a comprehensive single
review.
Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality Activities for FY 2014
RTCR
• In FY 2014, states should be revising state regulations in order to adopt the RTCR and be working to
submit their primacy applications. States have two years under SDWA to submit primacy
applications to EPA once a final rule has been promulgated.
• States will partner with EPA in developing guidance, fact sheets, and monitoring placards to assist
PWSs with implementing the RTCR. In addition, EPA will provide training to states on the RTCR and
states will conduct training for PWSs. See also Section III.B.I.
Integrated NPDES Program Reviews
• In FY 2014, EPA will continue the process of conducting integrated 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 four-year cycle, EPA expects to conduct 10-12 reviews in FY
2014.
• EPA will maintain and update its commitment and tracking system to reflect implementation of
action items identified in PQR/SRF NPDES reviews.
Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking Water and Clean Water Quality Program Measures
• Subobiective 2.1.1 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.
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
Office of Water Page 9 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
15
working to protect drinking water sources through collaboration and partnerships. Source water
16
includes surface water and ground water, as well as the interchange between them . 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 PWSs17 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.18 This includes the implementation of system-wide planning practices
such as asset management, water conservation and efficiency, energy efficiency, rate setting and
effective pricing practices.19
Maintaining Healthy Waters. Implementing holistic approaches, including green infrastructure, help
maintain healthy waters. The Nation has made significant progress in cleaning up polluted waters. Yet,
while substantial resources are devoted to restoring impaired waters, the Nation continues to
experience the loss of some of remaining healthy aquatic ecosystems.20 This is due to other significant
causes including habitat loss and fragmentation, hydrologic alteration and loss of connectivity, invasive
species, and climate change. The Healthy Watersheds Initiative21 (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.22
Supporting Green Infrastructure. EPA is collaborating with partner organizations and communities to
implement the Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda23 released in April 2011 (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
15 Read more on SWP at http ://water. epa. gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index. cfm.
16 Read more on ground water at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/groundwater/index.cfm.
17 Read more on Small Systems at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/drink/pws/smallsvstems/basicinformation.cfm.
18 Read more on Capacity Development at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/drink/pws/smallsvstems/index.cfm.
19 Read more on water infrastructure sustainability at http ://water. epa. gov/infrastructure/sustain/.
20 Heinz Center. State of the Nation's Ecosystems Report. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2008.
21 Read more on the HWI at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm and in Section III.C.a.ii and
C.l.b.
22 U.S. EPA (2011). Healthy Watersheds Initiative: National Framework and Action Plan. Office of Water. EPA
841-R-l 1-005. Read more on HWI at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm.
23 Read more at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/gi agenda_protectwaters.pdf.
Office of Water Page 10 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
America's Capitals and Sustainable Communities Building Blocks technical assistance programs. To date,
EPA's CWSRF has provided more than $400 million for green infrastructure practices.
Supporting Sustainable Water Infrastructure. EPA is pursuing a Sustainable Infrastructure Program24,
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 suite of activities which comprises the program is 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.
Sustainable Water Infrastructure is an integral part of the Sustainable Communities Partnership
between HUD, DOT, and EPA. EPA is 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 2014
Rebuilding After Hurricane Sandy. Addressing the devastation that Hurricane Sandy wrought on the
residents of New Jersey and New York is 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
24 Read more on the Sustainable Infrastructure Program at http ://water.epa. gov/infrastructure/sustain/.
Office of Water Page 11 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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.
To support Capacity Development for drinking water systems, states are expected to work together
with EPA, including through the State-EPA Asset Management Workgroup, and with other partners, on a
variety of activities:
• Sharing of tools, approaches, best practices, and innovations to promote sustainable practices,
including asset management25 and energy and water efficiency,26 at drinking water systems.
• Promoting the use of the Check Up Program for Small Systems (CUPSS) asset management
software.27
• Promoting EPA's Energy Use Assessment Tool28 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.29
• Disseminating best practices and maintaining focus to assist non-CWSs, including campgrounds,
restaurants, and hospitals, in reliably providing safe drinking water.30
• 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.31
• 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
restructuring 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.32
5 Read more on Asset Management at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/asset management.cfm.
6 Read more on Water and Energy Efficiency at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/waterefficiencv.cfm.
7 Read more on CUPSS at http://www.epa.gov/cupss.
8 Read more on the Energy Use Assessment Tool at see http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/energy use.cfm.
9 Read more on water efficiency at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/main wpnew.cfm.
30 Read about Non-Community Water Systems at water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/pws/factoids.cfm.
31 Read more on Water Sector Workforce at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/ws workforce.cfm.
32 Read more on Water System Partnerships at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/partnerships.cfm.
Office of Water Page 12 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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, benefits assessments, and
code reviews.
• EPA will continue its work with its federal and external partners through its Urban Waters Program.
• EPA will explore and develop 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.
• EPA will continue to work with designers, engineers, local communities, and other partners to
develop tools that help small communities evaluate appropriate wastewater infrastructure options.
• EPA will continue to work with HUD and DOT as part of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities
to coordinate federal housing, transportation, and other infrastructure investments to protect the
environment, promote equitable development, and help address the challenges of climate change.
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.33 EPA will report overall results after the two
years end in September 2013.
• WQ-17 tracks the fund utilization rate (cumulative loan agreement dollars to the cumulative funds
available for projects) for the CWSRF.
• WQ-22a (page 4, Appendix A) tracks the development of HWI Strategies implementation of
watershed protection plans.
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"34, 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
33 Read more on EPA's Small Systems Agency Priority Goal at http://goals.performance.gov/goal detail/EPA/366.
34 http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/nutrients/upload/memo nitrogen_framework.pdf
Office of Water Page 13 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 2014, 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 will provide nearly $35 million in financial assistance through the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to address agriculture-related nutrient, sediment, and pathogen
impairments in waters that are 303(d)-listed or otherwise impaired or threatened. Starting in FY 2013
additional consideration was given to impaired waters that are also sources of drinking water. States will
provide resources to monitor water quality progress in at least one NWQI watershed per state using
CWA Section 319 or other resources.
Under the NPDES permitting program, state and federal permitting authorities 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 state 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 partners to ensure effluent limits for nutrient pollution are included in permits where
necessary.
Controlling Nutrient Pollution Activities for FY 2014
• 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 2014 Section 106 grant work plans, EPA regions and state partners should specifically
discuss what actions will be taken in FY 2014 toward reducing nutrient pollution.
• EPA 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 2014 Section 106 grant work plans, EPA regions
and state partners should specifically discuss what actions will be taken in FY 2014 toward reducing
nutrient pollution.
• EPA encourages states to begin work immediately setting priorities on a watershed or statewide
basis, establishing nutrient reduction targets, and adopting numeric nutrient criteria for at least one
class of waterbodies by no later than 2016.
• EPA will focus on continuing to work with states to implement the Section 319 program reforms
including updating state NPS Management Plans.
• EPA managers should continue working with states to ensure effective permitting of nutrient
pollution to protect state WQS.
Controlling Nutrient Pollution Performance Measures
• One of the EPA's Agency Priority Goals for FY 2012-2013 calls for EPA to release new CWA Section
319 grant guidelines by November 2012 and for 50% of the states to revise their NPS programs
Office of Water Page 14 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
according to new Section 319 grant guidelines by September 30, 2013. In FY 2014, EPA will continue
to work with states to revise their NPS programs.
• WQ-Ola (page 3, Appendix A) tracks the number of numeric WQS for total nitrogen and total
phosphorus adopted by states and territories and approved by EPA, or promulgated by EPA.
• WQ-26 (page 3, Appendix A) tracks the number of states and territories implementing nutrient
reduction strategies.
• WQ-09a, b, and c (page 3, Appendix A) tracks 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 (page 3, Appendix A) 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 (page 4, Appendix A) 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 delivering high quality safe drinking water to consumers. SDWIS3S 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 Solutions for Water Programs, SDWIS. EPA is replacing the existing SDWIS
State software36, with SDWIS NextGen. EPA will leverage E-Enterprise solutions in developing the next
generation of SDWIS in partnership with states in order to enhance and improve state program
management and enable better targeting of resources to systems in need; reduce the total cost of
ownership; enable faster implementation of drinking water rules and provide tools to ensure consistent
determinations for compliance with drinking water rules; and support efficient sharing of drinking water
compliance monitoring data between EPA, states, and the public.
Enhancing Access to Drinking Water System Compliance Information. In March 2010, EPA announced
the Drinking Water Strategy (Strategy)37, 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. The Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) has been working with
states to identify data for sharing between EPA and states and data for posting on EPA's website to
understand reporting formats and approaches currently used by PWSs and laboratories to report data
and information to primacy agencies and to understand state data systems and the workload needed to
maintain them.
Read more on SDWIS at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisfed/index.cfm.
35
36 Read more on SDWIS State at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisstate/aboutstate.cfm.
37 Read more on the Drinking Water Strategy at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/dwstrategv/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 15 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Providing Accessible and Understandable Clean Water Data. EPA will continue to increase public
accessibility and understandability of water quality data and the effects of water quality on public health
and local economies. The Agency's goal is to simplify and automate reporting to raise awareness, reduce
burden, and increase transparency. EPA will support states' and tribes' management and use of water
quality data by improving automation of screening, analysis, visualization, and reporting of water quality
data to support priority setting, resource allocation for protection and restoration activities, and public
accountability. E-Enterprise solutions for clean water programs include tools to screen and analyze
water quality data available through the Storage and Retrieval Data Warehouse (STORE!)38 and the
Water Quality data portal and expanded display of water quality information via How's My Waterway
website/app39.
As EPA moves toward the development of an e-Enterprise solution for federal and state agencies and
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 states, EPA, and
the regulated community while giving the public more complete and improved information about
sources of water pollution in their communities.
Additionally, as part of the CWA Action Plan, EPA launched the NPDES Non-Stormwater General Permit
Web Inventory in FY 2012 to provide the public with better access to information about general permits
and in FY 2013 worked to add stormwater general permit information to the inventory. In FY 2014, OW
will continue to work with OECA to make NPDES data more readily accessible to the public.
Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information Activities for FY 2014
Drinking Water Information
1. States will participate in EPA-led development sessions to complete SDWIS NextGen. During FY
2014, states will also prepare to migrate data from SDWIS State and state-developed data systems
to SDWIS NextGen during FY 2015.
2. States will partner with EPA in identifying cost-effective ways to leverage web technologies to
support laboratories, water systems, states and EPA as they manage, report, and utilize drinking
water data and to improve data quality.
Clean Water Information
• EPA will increase amount of water quality data state programs transmit to EPA via the Water Quality
Exchange (WQX).
• EPA will improve user access in the Water Quality data Portal to available analytical tools and
models.
• EPA will deliver National Aquatic Resource Survey results and data to the public and science
community.
• EPA will 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.
38 Read more on STORET at http ://www. epa. gov/storet/.
39 Access "How's My Waterway?" at http://watersgeo.epa.gov/mywaterwav/.
Office of Water Page 16 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water Information Program Measures
Existing program measures do not track these activities. Implementation of the Drinking Water Strategy
and SDWIS NextGen 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 17 of 70
-------
FY 2014 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 ecosystem sustain fish; plants and wildlife; and economic, recreational, and
subsistence activities. As outlined in the EPA FY2011-2015 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 2014, 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 Health40.
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 2014
To support and enhance tribal efforts in FY 2014, 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 Tribes41 by using best practices developed over the last year to coordinate
and optimize tribal consultation efforts.
• 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 and improve
OW's website with training information relevant to tribes.
• 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.
40 Please see Protecting Populations at Risk, Section II. A. in this Guidance.
41 Read more on the EPA Policy at http://www.epa.gov/tribal/consultation/index.htm.
Office of Water Page 18 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• 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 (measures WQ-06a & b).
• Work with tribes to track improvements or where water quality is meeting
benchmark criteria and showing no degradation on tribal lands (measures WQ-
SP14a.Nll and WQ-SP14b.Nll).
• Implement any of the three approaches for protecting water quality contained in
the Final Guidance on Awards of Grants to Indian tribes under CWA Section 106,
regarding water quality standards. See Section III.C.I.a.i.
o Restore and improve water quality on a watershed basis. See Section III.C.I.b on HWI.
o Develop and manage NPS pollution programs (e.g. through watershed-based plans, BMPs,
and restoration activities). See Section Ill.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 through use of
infrastructure funding, technical assistance, and enforcement actions. See Section III.B.I.a.
• Continue to work in partnership with the Indian Health Service, USDA, and HUD through the
Infrastructure Task Force (ITF) to increase access to safe water.
• 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 staff have the training and experience 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.
Tribal Supporting Performance Measures
Throughout 2006 - 2013, 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.
Improved Water Quality on a Watershed Basis: WQ-SP14a.Nll; WQ-SP14b.Nll; WQ-02; WQ-03b; WQ-
06a; WQ-06b; WQ-12b; WQ-19b; WQ-23; WQ-24.N11.
Increase Wetlands: WT-SP22; WT-02a.
Office of Water Page 19 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
2. Protecting Urban Waters
The goal of the Urban Waters Program42 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 2014
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. The Urban Waters Program
anticipates the following activities in FY 2014:
• Continue to play an active role as a member of the Urban Waters Federal Partnership43 and facilitate
the meetings of the national Partnership Workgroup. Support existing Urban Waters Federal
Partnership pilot locations and work with member agencies to add new partnership locations. In
addition to supporting new locations, the Partnership expects to add new federal partner agencies
in FY 2014. Working together, the Partner agencies will continue to break down federal program
silos, promote more efficient and effective use of federal resources, and build new partnerships with
states, local entities and the private sector.
• Expects to announce its third funding opportunity through its very popular Urban Waters Small
Grants program44, which supports local urban waters projects that include eligible activities under
CWA Section 104(b)(3), the statutory authority for the grant program. Support to existing grantees
will continue through the Urban Waters Learning Network which receives support from the Urban
Waters Program. The Learning Network provides Urban Waters grantees a virtual forum for peer-to-
peer learning, exchanging ideas and best practices, and sharing technical expertise.
• Continue to support the Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration 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 second round of grant opportunities.
Modest funding from several agencies can leverage private funds and expanded commitment to
improving urban water quality goals.
• Continue to collaborate with OW program experts and across Agency programs 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, fish
advisories, and beach monitoring and notification. EPA's current work in the Chesapeake Bay, Great
Lakes, NEP, and Large Aquatic Ecosystem programs may offer additional place-based opportunities to
engage urban communities.
Urban Water Performance Measures
WQ-25a (page 4, Appendix A) tracks the number of urban water projects initiated addressing water
quality issues in the community.
42 Read more on the Urban Waters Program at http://www2.epa.gov/urbanwaters.
43 Read more on the Urban Waters Federal Partnership at http://www.urbanwaters.gov/.
44 Read more on the Urban Waters Small Grants at http://www.epa.gov/urbanwaters/funding/.
Office of Water Page 20 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 be possible only if the National Water Program is successful
in implementing a comprehensive and effective response to climate change.
In December 2012, the National Water Program published the National Water Program 2012 Strategy:
Response to Climate Change45 which builds on an earlier strategy released in 2008. The 2012 Strategy
documents the diversity and seriousness of climate change impacts on water resources, describes long-
term goals for protecting water resources for future generations, and provides the framework for the
water elements of the EPA Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plan that is now under
development and expected to be released in the summer of 2013.
Climate Change Activities for FY2014
FY 2014 will be a critical year for the response to the water resources impacts of a changing climate. The
new National Climate Assessment will be published early in 2014, describing in detail, climate change
impacts on water at the national and regional levels. Additionally, water program managers will have
made some progress in initial implementation of both the 2012 Strategy and the broader EPA Climate
Change Adaptation Implementation Plan.
The program subobjective sections of this Guidance provide for the implementation of the specific
"strategic actions" actions that advance climate change adaptation in each of the five key areas46 in FY
2014. In substantive terms, these actions include efforts focused directly on the challenges posed by a
changing climate (e.g., the Climate Ready Utilities Program and the Climate Ready Estuaries Program) as
well as programs that more generally improve the resilience of aquatic ecosystems to climate change
impacts (e.g., wetlands protection and assessment efforts, assisting water utilities in responding to
extreme weather events, HWI, and development of the stormwater permit program to include new
"green infrastructure practices".
The release of the EPA Climate Change Adaptation Plan in the summer of 2013 will include program
specific details and refined approaches not included in this Guidance. In addition, a more detailed
blueprint for implementation of climate change response actions by the National Water Program in FY
2014 will be developed at the end of FY 2013. OW will work with the State and Tribal Climate Change
Council (STC3) in this effort. Effective implementation of these individual actions and projects in FY 2014
will significantly advance the National Water Program response to climate change. By FY 2014, however,
it is also important that EPA national programs, EPA regions, states, and tribes are working as a team
to make policy decisions and oversee and implement climate change response actions.
National Water Program Offices. National water program offices in EPA headquarters will need to
identify and advance top priority climate adaptation implementation actions and continue to translate
growing understanding of adaptation needs into specific adjustments that regions, states, and tribes
need to make to clean water and drinking water programs. The Office of the Assistant Administrator for
Water will need to take a lead role in representing climate change and water issues to other EPA
program offices, the Office of Research and Development (ORD), and regions.
EPA Regions. Water programs in EPA regions will need to have gained a clear understanding of the
climate and water risks that are most important in each region and established working relationships
with states, tribes, and water utilities to define actions that each state can implement in order to adapt
45 Read more at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/climatechange/2012-National-Water-Program-Strategv.cfm.
46 Read about these five key areas on the View EPA Actions tab at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/climatechange/.
Office of Water Page 21 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
clean water and drinking water programs that they administer to a changing climate. Regions will need
to provide a bridge for states, tribes, and utilities to draw on the resources of other federal agencies.
States and Tribes. In FY 2014, OW will work with state and tribal water programs to define some initial,
high priority, climate change adaptation actions for clean water and drinking water programs.
Collectively, states and tribes should move from initial assessment of the threats posed by a changing
climate to cooperate with EPA and other federal agencies to address priority climate change adaptation
impacts and respond to water utilities, local governments, and other stakeholders seeking assistance to
address climate change challenges. OW will work with these key players throughout 2014 to identify
options to support a collaborative, team approach to policy development and program implementation
in response to climate change.
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 competitors47.
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.
47 Read more on the vision for technology innovation at http://www2.epa.gov/envirofinance/innovation.
Office of Water Page 22 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
.48
The Acting Administrator for OW, Nancy Stoner, released a Technology Innovation Blueprint , 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 FY2014
• EPA water program will assemble a technology innovation work group to help foster technology
innovation throughout OW, as well as lead efforts to identify specific opportunities within programs.
• EPA water program will assess all programs and initiatives to identify where opportunities exist to
leverage technology innovation.
• EPA water program will address potential barriers that must be addressed to ensure successful
implementation.
• EPA water program will ensure the use of innovative technology as a means to address current
program priorities.
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 5700.5A149, 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
48 Read more on OW's blueprint for technology innovation at http://water.epa.gov/blueprint.cfm.
49 Read more at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/competition/5700 5 a 1 comp_policv revised.pdf.
Office of Water Page 23 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
50
requirements related to Grants.gov , 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 DIG. Baseline monitoring
activities must be documented in the Post-Award Database in the Integrated Grants Management
System (IGMS). Advanced monitoring activities must be documented in the official grant file and the
Grantee Compliance Database in IGMS.
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 October 12, 2012 to be
50 Access Grants.gov at http://www.grants.gov.
Office of Water Page 24 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
used for 2012 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 2013 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 Reports51. 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 Application52) 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
Funds53. 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.
51 Read more at http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/policv/fmal grants_policv issuance 11 03 state grant_workplans.pdf.
52 Available at https://ofmext.epa.gov/apex/sgita/f?p=SGITA:Home:.
53 Read more at http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/policv/gpi 12 06 timely obligation.pdf.
Office of Water Page 25 of 70
-------
FY 2014 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 2014.
1. Water Safe to Drink
The fundamental public health protection mission of the national drinking water program54 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, 51,877 CWSs55 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)56 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 NPDWR57 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 2014
The Agency, headquarters and regions, will continue to address the development or revision of drinking
water standards to protect human health in 2014 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.
• Between January 2013 and December 2015, continue to implement the third Unregulated
Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR3)58; reporting of monitoring results will continue into mid-
2016. States that volunteered to support UCMR3 by signing Partnership Agreements (PAs) in
54 Read more on drinking water at http://water.epa.gov/drink/.
55 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 2012, there were 51,877 CWSs. EPA also continues to focus attention on addressing compliance and
sustainability challenges faced by non-CWSs.
56 Read more on CCLs at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/dws/ccl/.
57 Read more on NPDWRs at http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm.
58 Read more on UCMR3 at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ucmr/ucmr3/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 26 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
2011will be assisting with the collection of samples from small systems and supporting compliance
follow-up.
• Provide technical and scientific support that includes the development and validation of analytical
methods for updating rules and implementing the UCMR, training states and supporting them in
their oversight of Cryptosporidium laboratories, and responding to technical implementation
questions regarding the entire range of NPDWRs.
• Continue to develop technical guidance and perform other follow-up activities related to the
implementation of RTCR59.
• Continue to conduct the retrospective review of drinking water regulations in response to President
Obama's recent call in Executive Order 13563 for each federal agency to "develop ... a preliminary
plan, consistent with law and its resources and regulatory priorities, under which the agency will
periodically review its existing significant regulations to determine whether any such regulations
should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed so as to make the agency's regulatory
program more effective or less burdensome in achieving the regulatory objectives." The
retrospective review includes the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) requirements, the Long Term
2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2)60, the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR)61, and the
requirements related to carcinogenic volatile organic compounds (cVOCs).
• In 2014, propose Revisions to LCR after receiving, reviewing, and evaluating comments and
information submitted as part of enhanced stakeholder engagement process in 2013. In the
development of the proposed revisions to the LCR, input will be sought through expert panels,
public workshops, and a work group, and other stakeholder meetings, as well as from peer reviewed
scientific literature. State representatives participated on the work group and updates on LCR
progress are being provided by EPA at Association of State Drinking Water Administrator's meetings.
Included with the revisions to the LCR will be requirements for compliance with the Reduction in
Lead in Drinking Water Act (2011).
• In FY 2014, EPA will publish the final fourth CCL (CCL4) after receiving, reviewing, and evaluating
comments and information submitted in response to publication of the draft fourth CCL in FY 2013.
The CCL identifies drinking water contaminants which may require regulation and are known or
anticipated to occur in public drinking water supplies.
• Continue to evaluate new information on health effects, occurrence, treatment technologies, and
other information for regulated contaminants to identify, prioritize, and target candidates for
regulatory 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
(Six-Year Review 3) with the current goal to have final results by 2016.
• In FY 2014, EPA will publish the Final Regulatory Determinations for the third CCL (CCL3) after
receiving, reviewing, and evaluating comments and information submitted in response to
publication of the Preliminary Regulatory Determinations in FY 2013. These determinations will
determine which, if any, CCL 3 contaminants are appropriate for regulation.
• In 2011, EPA decided to regulate perchlorate under SDWA. EPA intends to publish the proposed
regulation and analyses for public review and comment by December 2013.
• Continue to review and evaluate comments submitted in response to publication of the proposed
cVOCs Group Regulation in 2014. The group includes trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene
(PCE), and other regulated and unregulated carcinogenic volatile contaminants in the group. OW has
Read more on RTCR at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/tcr/regulation revisions.cfm.
59
60 Read more on LT2 at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/lt2/index.cfm.
61 Read more on the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/nilesregs/sdwa/lcr/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 27 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
made significant progress in addressing contaminants in groups (rather than one at a time) by
holding a national conversation with the public and stakeholders including utilities, rural
communities, and states. EPA expects to publish the Final cVOCs Group Regulation in 2015.
• Continue to collaborate with stakeholders, scientists, and the public to undertake the highest
priority research and information collection activities to better understand water quality issues.
• Continue to explore how best to address concerns raised about the cleanliness, health protection,
and safety of finished drinking water storage facilities (e.g. tanks) based on public comments
received on the Proposed RTCR in July of 2010.
• Address the second Drinking Water Strategy principle, which is fostering the development of new
drinking water technologies to address health risks posed by a broad array of contaminants.
ii. Implementation of Drinking Water Standards/Regulations and Technical Assistance. The
implementation of programs designed to assist PWSs in complying with drinking water regulations is
essential to EPA's core mission of protecting public health in the U.S.
Development/Revision of Drinking Water Standards/Regulations Activities for 2014
EPA will work in concert with states and tribes to facilitate PWS compliance with drinking water
regulations through a variety of activities:
• Conduct Sanitary Surveys62: 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 will be 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.
• Conduct Technical Assistance and Training63: States, tribes, and EPA direct implementation
programs should focus their assistance to water systems to address their implementation
challenges, particularly with the Ground Water Rule64 and the Stage 2 Disinfection/Disinfection By-
Products Rule65. By October 2013, Schedule 3 (serving 10,000 - 49,999) and Schedule 4 (serving
<10,000) systems that did not perform Cryptosporidium monitoring must begin Stage 2 compliance
monitoring. By October 2014, Schedule 4 (serving <10,000) systems that performed Cryptosporidium
monitoring must begin Stage 2 compliance monitoring. 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 AWOP66, 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
62 Read more on sanitary surveys at http://water.epa.gov/learn/training/dwatraining/sanitarvsurvev/index.cfm.
63 Read more on EPA's training on the National Primary Drinking Water Rules at
http ://water. epa. gov/learn/training/dwatraining/index. cfm.
64 Read more on the Groundwater Rule (GWR) at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/gwr/index.cfm.
65 Read more on the Stage 2 DBF rule at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/stage2/index.cfm.
66 Read more on AWOP at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/pws/optimization/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 28 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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: States are
required to provide accurate and complete inventory, violations, and enforcement data to SDWIS.
States may do this through the SDWIS State software developed by EPA to provide support for state
implementation of the PWSS program67 or through submission of files through the State-EPA
Exchange Network.
• 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. DWSRF68 and Sustainable Water Infrastructure. EPA's drinking water program is emphasizing several
national SRF priorities to strengthen the program for the long-term. These include increasing the speed
with which appropriated funds move to projects; ensuring that the highest priority projects are ready to
proceed to funding; reducing unliquidated obligations within state DWSRF programs, ensuring the
financial integrity of the program through strong auditing, consistent with overarching federal law and
guidance; and enhancing coordination between the DWSRF and PWSS programs.
DWSRF and Sustainable Water Infrastructure Activities for 2014
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 utilization69 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 Survey70 of
approximately 53,000 CWSs and 21,400 not-for-profit non-CWSs.
• Use the program's new model Intended Use Plan (IUP)71 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 Policy72 to promote water system TFM capacity
as a critical means to meet infrastructure needs and further enhance program performance and
67 Read more on SDWIS State at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/drink/sdwisstate/aboutstate.cfm.
68 Read more on DWSRF at http ://water. epa. gov/grants funding/dwsrf/index. cfm.
69 Read more on the fund utilization rate at
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/memos/memo dwsrf_policv 2003-02-25.pdf.
70 Read more on the Needs Survey at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/dwns/index.cfm.
71 Read more on intended use plans at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsvs/pkg/FR-2000-08-07/html/00-19783.htm.
72 Read more on the SRF Sustainability Policy at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/Clean-Water-and-
Drinking-Water-Infrastructure-Sustainabilitv-Policv.cfm.
Office of Water Page 29 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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.73
• Coordinate across drinking water programs, including the PWSS, 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 Security74. 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 2014
In FY 2014, EPA will move to the next phase of the Water Security Initiative (WSI)75 pilot program and
the Water Laboratory Alliance (WLA). EPA will, in collaboration with our regional counterparts, states,
and utilities:
• Issue the Water Quality Surveillance and Response System Deployment Tool, 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
deploying computer based decision support tools 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 2014, 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.
73 Read more on set-aside use to promote capacity development at
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrt7pdfs/techas.pdf. http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/capdev.pdf.
http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/dwsrf/pdfs/opcert.pdf.
74 Read more on water system security at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/index.cfm.
75 Read more on WSI at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/lawsregs/initiative.cfm.
Office of Water Page 30 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Provide technical assistance to state/local governments on coordinating the recovery of and
integrating resiliency into drinking water and wastewater infrastructure systems.
• Plan and conduct series of extreme weather event workshops with Atlantic coastal communities.
These workshops would address both short term emergency preparedness and long term planning.
• Promote awareness and adoption of drinking water and wastewater preparedness and resiliency
programs throughout the Nation to further Agency priorities and the interests, needs, and priorities
of stakeholders through outreach efforts at water sector, and other interdependent sectors
conferences and exhibits.
• Develop and conduct webcasts and exercises to prepare utilities, emergency responders, and
decision-makers to evaluate and respond to physical, cyber, and contamination threats and events;
• Create, update, and disseminate tools and provide technical assistance to ensure that water and
wastewater utilities and emergency responders react rapidly and effectively to intentional
contamination and natural disasters.
• Sustain and improve the operation of the Water Desk in the Agency's Emergency Operations Center
by updating roles/responsibilities, improving internal communications, training staff in the incident
command structure, ensuring adequate staffing during activation of the desk, and coordinating with
EPA regional field personnel and response partners.
• Refine and provide outreach and training on a risk assessment tool that will enable utilities to
address the risks from all hazards, including climate change impacts.
• 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 Programs76. See National Water Program Area of Focus in Section II.C,
Protecting Drinking Water Supplies.
vi. Underground Injection Control77. 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 2014
EPA will work in concert with states and tries to facilitate UIC compliance through a variety of activities,
including:
• Implementation of the UIC programs for well classes I - V to ensure that injection wells are
permitted and operated in a manner that protects USDW from endangerment. (See measures SDW-
07 and SDW-08.)
• Submission of well-specific data for well classes I - V to the UIC National Database.
• For state programs seeking primacy for the Class VI well program, development of complete primacy
applications for the Class VI well program and work 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 the state once
primacy has been granted. (See measures SDW-19a and SDW-19b.)
76 Read more on SWP at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/drinkingwater/sourcewater/protection/index.cfm.
77 Read more on UIC at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/groundwater/uic/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 31 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Complete a review of existing guidance and subsequent practices and conduct rigorous analyses of
aquifer exemption requests to ensure that proposed exempted areas are not current or reasonably
expected future sources of drinking water.
• Ensure that hydraulic fracturing using diesel fuel is authorized under the applicable DIG 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 2014.
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 2014 to EPA regions that receive tribal PWSS funding to support the Tribal Drinking Water
Program. This Guidance for FY 2014 includes guidance for state 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 program78 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 2014.
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 2014
Building on the ongoing efforts of grantees to implement the PWSS program, FY 2014 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
Ground Water Rule, the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and the Long-
term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule; and
78 Read more on the PWSS Grant Program at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/pws/index.cfm and the Tribal
PWSS Grant Program at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/pws/allotments tribal fs.cfm.
Office of Water Page 32 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Technical and compliance assistance to PWSs.
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 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
79
This Guidance for FY 2014 includes guidance for state recipients of DWSRF program grants . 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
79 Read more on DWSRF grant programs at http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 33 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
capitalization grants, as well as other grant funds, repayments, and other resources. A Project Priority
List is a required element of the IUP. The Project Priority List is a cornerstone of the IUP and presents all
the capital projects awaiting DWSRF assistance in priority funding order. States must also include a
"Fundable List" showing the specific projects that the state actually anticipates being ready to proceed
to receiving assistance in the year ahead. Additionally, states are required to submit set-aside work
plans that detail how set-aside funds will be used. Finally, states must submit, biennially, a report that
explains how DWSRF funds were actually used. States are also required to submit annual data on
program performance. Auditing is required to the extent laid out in the Single Audit Act.
EPA regions perform annual on-site reviews of state programs, including project file reviews and
transaction testing. For ARRA, an ARRA specific review was added as well as ARRA specific project file
reviews and transaction testing. These reviews serve as EPA's baseline monitoring for the DWSRF.
The DWSRF grant allotments are based on the Drinking Water Needs Survey. State-by-state allotments,
territorial funds, and the total amount available to each region for tribes will be available at
http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/dwsrf/index.cfm.
In FY 2014, 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
emphasis on expediting/streamlining project outlay and billing to reduce ULOs.
Underground Injection Control Grants Grant Guidance to states and tribes
The DIG Program is vital to the protection of USDW. EPA works with states and tribes to regulate and
monitor the injection of fluids, both hazardous and non-hazardous, into wells, to prevent contamination.
This Guidance for FY 2014 includes guidance for state and tribal recipients of DIG grant program funds.
Each year, grant funds are distributed by the national DIG Program to help DIG programs enforce the
minimum federal DIG requirements80. These funds are authorized by Congress under SDWA Section
1443. Grant recipients are expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives,
sub-objectives, strategic targets, and PAMs specified in this Guidance. In addition, grant resources
should be focused on ensuring that the gains of the previous years' efforts are preserved and built upon.
The overall objective of the DIG grant program is to protect public health by enforcing minimum
requirements to ensure that:
• All injection is authorized under either general rules or specific permits;
• Injection well owners and operators do not site, construct, operate, maintain, convert, plug,
abandon, or conduct any other injection activity that endangers USDW;
• Injected fluids stay within the well and the intended injection zone; and
• No injection occurs which allows for the introduction of any contaminant into an USDW if the
presence of that contaminant may cause a violation of any primary drinking water standard or
otherwise adversely affect public health.
Assisting owners and operators of UIC facilities in meeting these objectives require grantees to adopt a
variety of approaches and to coordinate efforts with other groundwater protection programs. FY 2013
priority activities for the UIC grant fund recipients should include the following:
• Timely submission of primacy program revisions for the purpose of adopting new or revised
federal regulations;
80 Read more on UIC grants at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/groundwater/uic/Grants.cfm.
Office of Water Page 34 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Maintaining program capacity to implement DIG program requirements for all classes of wells;
• Ensuring that Class I, II and III (salt solution) wells that lose mechanical integrity are returned to
compliance;
• 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." UIC Grant
Guidance #42 provides more detail about the UIC Grant Allocation Model81, including how the model
works and examples of how the UIC funds may be used.
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 of fish consumption recommendations and
risks in order to help people make more informed choices about selecting fish to eat.
Fish and Shellfish Activities for FY2014
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
81 Read more on the UIC Grant Allocation Model at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/guidance.html.
82 Read more on fish consumption advisories at http://www.epa.gov/hg/advisories.htm.
Office of Water Page 35 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
critical areas and sources are identified, expanded monitoring and development of TMDLs may support
revision of discharge permit limits to ensure compliance with applicable CWA requirements.
Another key element of the strategy is to expand and improve information and notification of the risks
of fish consumption. As part of this work, EPA is also encouraging and supporting states and tribes to
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 2014, EPA's national strategy for improving the safety of recreational waters will include four key
elements:
• Work to implement 2012 Recreational Water Quality Criteria for pathogen indicators;
• Identify unsafe recreational waters;
• Reduce pathogen indicator levels in all recreational waters; and
• Provide technical and program support to states for their beach monitoring and notification
activities.
Safe Swimming Activities for FY2014
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
83 For more info, please see http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/health/recreation/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 36 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
accomplish the needed restoration. A key part of this work is to maintain strong progress toward
implementation of TMDLs.
In a related effort, OW will work in partnership with OECA to better focus compliance and enforcement
resources to unsafe recreational waters. In addition, wet weather discharges, which are a major source
of pathogens, are one of OECA's national priorities.
Reduce Pathogen Indicator Densities in Recreational Waters Generally. In addition to focusing on
waters that are unsafe for swimming today, EPA will continue working with states, local governments,
and tribes in FY 2014 to reduce the overall level of pathogens and other harmful pollutants discharged
to recreational waters using three key approaches:
• Reduce pollution from CSOs that are not in compliance with the CWA and 1994 CSO Control Policy;
• Address other sources discharging sewage-contaminated water under the NPDES permit program;
and
• Encourage improved management of septic systems.
Overflows from Combined Sewer Systems (CSSs) and Sanitary Sewer Systems (SSSs) most often contain
high levels of suspended solids, pathogenic microorganisms, toxic pollutions, floatables, nutrients,
oxygen-demanding organic compounds, oil and grease, and other pollutants and can cause exceedances
of WQS. Such exceedances may pose risks to human health, threaten aquatic life and its habitat, and
impair the use and enjoyment of the Nation's waterways. EPA is working with states and local
governments to fully implement the CSO Policy providing for the development and implementation of
long-term CSO control plans. EPA expects that 790 (92%) out of the 853 CSO communities will have
enforceable schedules in place to implement approved long-term CSO control plans, including sewer
separation, in FY 2014 (see measure SS-1). EPA will also work with states to resolve longstanding issues
associated with sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and bypasses at treatment plants.
Other key sources of fecal contamination to the Nation's waters are discharges from CAFOs, municipal
storm sewer systems, and industrial facilities. EPA expects to work with states to assure that these
facilities are covered by permits where necessary. In addition, EPA expects to work with the states to
develop approaches for monitoring wet weather discharges and impacts to surface waters, developing
water quality-based effluent limits, and identifying effective control measures and BMPs. For CAFOs,
NPDES regulations currently require facilities with discharges to seek permit coverage. Full
implementation of the NPDES permitting requirement for CAFOs may result in reduced discharges of
contamination due to permitting requirements that place controls on discharges of manure and process
wastewater.
Finally, there is growing evidence that ineffective septic systems are adversely impacting water
resources. EPA will work with state, tribal, and local governments to develop voluntary approaches to
improving management of these systems.
Provide Technical Support for Beach Monitoring and Public Notification. Another important element of
the strategy for improving the safety of recreational waters is improving monitoring of public beaches
and notifying the public of unsafe conditions. Following the RWQC, OW will issue updated National
Beach Guidance and Required Performance Criteria (Beach Guidance) in 2013. The Beach Guidance will
describe improved approaches to notifying the public of exceedances of thresholds included in the
RWQC. The guidance incorporates new media and describes proven best practices and innovative
approaches to communicating advisories to the public.
Office of Water Page 37 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
C. Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and
Wetlands
1. Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
In FY 2014, EPA will 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
In FY 2014, EPA, states, and tribes need to continue to effectively implement and better integrate
programs established under CWAto 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 2014
include:
• Strengthen the WQS program;
• Improve water quality monitoring and assessment;
• Implement TMDLs and other watershed plans;
• Strengthen the NPDES permit program;
• Implement practices to reduce pollution from all NPSs;
• Implement the CWSRF; and
• Support drinking water protection, through a variety of means, including the CWA-SDWA
Collaboration Initiative.
As part of this process, EPA will continue efforts to integrate across programs, media and federal
agencies to more effectively support efforts to protect and restore waters, including drinking water
sources, as envisioned in the CWA-SDWA Collaboration Initiative (Section II.C. Protecting Water
Supplies). In the event that OW finds that existing programs, initiatives, or processes are not resulting in
a significant contribution to national goals, we will work with regions, states, tribes, and other partners
to rethink and redesign the delivery of clean water programs to more effectively protect and restore
waterbodies and watersheds. Similarly, EPA regional offices have the flexibility to emphasize various
parts of core national programs and modify targets to meet EPA regional and state needs and
conditions.
Office of Water Page 38 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and Interstate Agencies: General Information
This National Water Program Guidance for FY 2014 includes guidance for state and interstate recipients
of Section 106 grants for Water Pollution Control Programs. As a general matter, grant recipients are
expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives, subobjectives, strategic
targets, and measures specified in Section III.C.I of this Guidance. In addition, this section includes
specific guidance for state and interstate grant recipients in these Section 106 Grant Guidance areas.
Together, section III.C.I, the grant guidance sections, and Appendix D replace the biannual Section 106
Grant Guidance. The Guidance for FY 2014 continues this practice of incorporating Section 106 grants
guidance.
Starting in FY 2014, the Section 106 Program will begin 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 is currently developing guidance for the use of associated program support
costs authority by the Section 106 Program. In addition, the use of associated program support authority
costs 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
/'. 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.
Water Quality Standards Activities for FY 2014
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
II.D.
Continuing degradation of previously high quality waters is of increasing concern. EPA's antidegradation
policy calls for states and authorized tribes to conduct a public review of proposed activities that are
84 Please see http://epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/106tgg07.htm. Tribes with EPA-approved WQS should also see the
Section 106 guidance on WQS for states, interstate agencies, and authorized tribes below.
85 Please see http://water.epa.gov/grants funding/cwf/106-guidelines-monitor.cfm.
86 Please see http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/index.htm.
87 Please see http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/.
Office of Water Page 39 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 reaffirms EPA's
commitment to partnering with states and collaborating with stakeholders to make greater progress in
accelerating the reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus loadings to our Nation's waters. EPA continues to
encourage states to set priorities on a watershed or statewide basis, establish nutrient reduction
targets, and adopt numeric nutrient criteria for at least one class of waterbodies by no later than 2016.
As part of the framework, EPA continues to place a high priority on states adopting numeric WQS for
total nitrogen and total phosphorus that apply to all waters in each of three waterbody types - lakes and
reservoirs, rivers and streams, and estuaries-to help reduce or prevent eutrophication and other
problems in those waters. To help EPA track state progress, states should provide EPA a full set of
performance milestone information concerning total nitrogen and total phosphorus numeric criteria
development, proposal, and adoption (see measures WQ-Ola and WQ-26). When developing FY 2014
grant workplans, EPA regions and state partners should specifically discuss what progress will be made
in FY 2014 towards reducing nutrient pollution.
88 Read the Final Section 106 Tribal Grant Guidance at http ://water.epa. gov/grants funding/cwf/1 06tgg07 . cfm.
Tribes that EPA has foun
administer WQS programs.
89 Tribes that EPA has found eligible under CWA section 5 18(e) to be treated in a similar manner as a state (TAS) to
Office of Water Page 40 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
EPA strongly encourages states and authorized tribes without antidegradation implementation methods
to establish them as soon as possible, consistent with EPA's regulation.
States and tribes should make their WQS accessible to the public on the Internet in a systematic format.
Users should be able to identify the current EPA-approved standards that apply to each waterbody in
the state or reservation, for example by providing tables and maps of designated uses and related
criteria. EPA has developed the Water Quality Standards Database (WQSDB) for this purpose. EPA will
provide a copy of WQSDB90 for a state or tribe to populate, operate, and maintain locally if it does not
have its own database.
/'/'. 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 monitoring91 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 rivers-and-streams survey will be conducted in FY 2013 and FY 2014. The report will be
completed in FY 2016. As part of the national surveys, EPA, states, and tribes will collaborate to plan the
FY 2015 field sampling for the National Coastal Condition Assessment. A report for the National Wetland
Condition Assessment will be issued in 2014 (the field work for this report occurred in 2011). EPA and
states will complete data analysis and peer review of the second National Lakes Assessment to meet the
FY 2015 report target.
EPA also stresses the importance of using statistical surveys to generate statewide assessments and
track broad-scale trends; enhancing and implementing designs to address water information needs at
local scales (e.g., watersheds) including monitoring waters where restoration actions have been
implemented, and integrating both statistical surveys and targeted monitoring to assess the condition of
all water resources over time. EPA developed a Statewide Statistical Survey Web Data Entry Tool to
facilitate reporting of these results with the state Integrated Report (IR).
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 measures WQ-06a and WQ-06b). As tribal strategies are developed,
EPA will work with tribes to implement them over time.
EPA is also working with tribes to track improvements where water quality is meeting benchmark
criteria and showing no degradation on tribal lands (see measures WQ-SP14a.Nll and WQ-SP14b.Nll).
EPA will also continue to work with state 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
90 Request a copy of the WQSDB and guidance for installation and use at
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/wqshome index.cfm.
91 Read more on monitoring data at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/watersheds/monitoring/monintr.cfm.
Office of Water Page 41 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
1.92 .
document 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 (see measure WQ-22a). 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.
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and Interstate Agencies: 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"93 (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 Guidance94, which calls for states to implement their
monitoring strategies by 2014. During FY 2014, 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), and listing of impaired waters
under CWA Section 303(d) by April 1, 2014.
In FY 2014, EPA will include a term and condition in 106 grants that states will transmit their water
quality data to the national STORE! Warehouse using the WQX framework to satisfy the general
obligation to report water quality data annually.95 EPA will support states' use of WQX and WQX Web to
submit data to the STORE! Data Warehouse and use of OWIR-ATT and ADB to submit IR results to EPA
through technical assistance and Exchange Network grants. 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.
92Read more at U.S. EPA (2012). Identifying and Protecting Healthy Watersheds Concepts, Assessments, and
Management Approaches. EPA 841-B-l 1-002. http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/hw techdocument.cfm.
http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm.
93 Read more on the Elements Guidance at http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/elements/elements03 14 03.pdf.
94Read more on the Elements Guidance at http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/elements/elements03 14 03.pdf.
95Read more on STORET and WQX at http://www.epa.gov/storet/wqx/.
Office of Water Page 42 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Beginning in FY 2014, EPA is offering to fund field and laboratory services for states and tribes through
its authority to use Section 106 funds to provide associated program support. 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 for the National Coastal Condition Assessment as
well as field sampling for the entire site or for fish only. 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.
/'/'/'. Implement TMDLs and Other Watershed Related Plans
Development and implementation of TMDLs for 303(d) listed waterbodies is a critical tool for meeting
water quality restoration goals96. 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/programs. Strong networks foster efficient strategies to address water quality
impairments.97 Through partnerships with the states, as well as with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), USFS98, and others, EPA has established networks that are uniquely positioned to improve
water quality through development and implementation of TMDLs, TMDL alternatives, and other
restoration actions.
EPA will track the degree to which states develop TMDLs or take other appropriate actions (TMDL
alternatives) on approved schedules, based on a goal of at least 80% on pace each year to meet state
schedules or straight-line rates that ensure that the national policy of TMDL development within 8-13
years of listing is met (see measure WQ-08). In 2014, the CWA 303(d) Listing and TMDL Program will
engage with states on the implementation of the new 10-year vision for the program. As part of this
effort, EPA will continue to work with states to identify a new measure to better measure the success of
the program. It is anticipated that any new measure would be ready for public comment in the FY 2015
Guidance.
For waters impaired by problems for which TMDLs are not appropriate, EPA will work with partners to
develop and implement activities and watershed plans to restore these waters (e.g., TMDL alternatives).
Additionally, EPA will work with partners to improve our ability to identify and protect healthy
waters/watersheds, and to emphasize integration of and application of core program tools, the
96Read more on TMDLs at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/index.cfm.
97-
Read more on working with partners at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/tmdl/partners index.cfm.
y8Read more on the partnership with U.S. Forest Service at http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/usfsepamoa/.
Office of Water Page 43 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
watershed approach, and innovative ideas for protecting these waters. Moreover, EPA has been working
with states on training and other assistance on how to more effectively address stormwater
impairments under two key programs of the CWA: the Section 303(d) TMDL Program and the NPDES
Stormwater Program. EPA will assist states with the translation of TMDL Waste Load Allocations into
NPDES stormwater permits, as well as support innovative approaches, such as impervious cover
surrogate TMDLs, to address the considerable number of waterbodies affected by stormwater
discharges.
Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and Interstate Agencies: Identifying Impairments
and Developing TMDLs
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. For 2014, EPA will continue to
work with states, interstate agencies, and tribes to foster a watershed approach as the guiding principle
of clean water programs. In watersheds where WQS are not attained, states will develop TMDLs, critical
tools for meeting water restoration goals. See information above and measure WQ-08 for information
on EPA's expectations. States have started to address more difficult TMDLs, such as broad-scale mercury
and nutrient TMDLs, which require involvement at the state and federal level across multiple programs.
EPA will also continue to work with states to facilitate accurate, comprehensive, and georeferenced data
made available to the public via the Assessment, TMDL Tracking, and Implementation System (ATTAINS).
iv. Strengthen the NPDES Permit Program
The NPDES Program" requires point source dischargers to be permitted and requires pretreatment
programs to control discharges from industrial and other facilities 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 recent increases in the scope of
the program arising from court orders and environmental issues. In addition, the NPDES Program has
been working closely with OECAto implement the CWA Action Plan100. Some key NPDES program efforts
include:
NPDES Program Work Planning and Oversight: OWM and OECA are jointly implementing an effort to
strengthen performance in the NPDES program by integrating and streamlining approaches for oversight
of NPDES permitting and enforcement, including a rule replacing existing paper reporting with electronic
reporting, in order to automate compliance evaluations and improve transparency. This current
initiative builds upon recent efforts by OECA and OW to strengthen implementation of the NPDES
permit and enforcement programs under the CWA Action Plan.
Permit Quality Reviews (PQR), and Action Items, and Integrated PQR and State Review Framework
(PQR-SRF) Reviews101: 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 2014. Under CWA Action Plan,
OW conducted several Transitional PQRs in the first half of FY 2012 while OW collaborated with OECA to
carry out several Integrated PQR-SRF Reviews in the second half of FY 2012. Based on lessons learned
"Read more on the NPDES Program at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/.
100Read more on the CWA Action Plan at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/civil/cwa/cwaenfplan.html.
101 Read more on PQRs at http://cfpubl.epa.gov/npdes/pqr.cfm.
Office of Water Page 44 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
from these FY 2012 reviews, region-led PQR-SRF integrated reviews began in FY 2013 and will continue
in FY 2014.
Program Integrity: In FY 2012, EPA increased emphasis in working with states to ensure the integrity of
the NPDES program. Consistent with the CWA Action Plan, EPA worked to integrate program and
enforcement oversight to ensure the most significant actions affecting water quality are included in an
accountability system and are addressed. In FY 2013, regional permitting programs coordinated with the
regional enforcement programs to schedule and conduct CWA oversight reviews using the integrated
permitting and enforcement oversight process, and draft IRs using HQguidance. Regions use NPDES
program performance reports to inform regular discussions with states and to track performance.
Regions will also review Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) as part of the integrated review process
using the OW/OECA criteria and checklist. In FY 2014, EPA will continue conducting region-led,
coordinated reviews of states NPDES permitting and enforcement programs. EPA will also continue the
process to make streamlining revisions to various parts of the existing NPDES application and permit
regulations to improve program clarity, protection of water quality, program transparency, and
efficiency.
High Priority Permits: EPA works with states and EPA regions 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. Targets for measures WQ-19a and b are based on a universe of priority permit
candidates that shifts each year, and those fluctuations in the measure's universe make trend analysis
difficult. In FY 2013, EPA revised the selection, commitment, and results calculation method to allow
EPA to set a better baseline and improve the overall effectiveness of the measure. While the universe
still shifts year to year, it is now consistently selected each year with approximately 20% of permits
expired greater than two years being selected as priority and states and EPA regions committing to issue
a percentage of that universe. Starting in FY 2013, results were calculated as a percentage of total
priority permits issued instead of a percentage of the commitment achieved. This revised method will
continue for FY 2014.
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 Infrastructure102: As discussed in Section II.C, Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources
and Infrastructure, EPA is collaborating with partner organizations and communities to implement the
Green Infrastructure Strategic Agenda103 released in April 2011. In FY 2014, EPA will provide technical
assistance to community partners, deliver webinars, and prepare guidance to address technical,
regulatory, and economic barriers to green infrastructure and 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.
Pesticides104: 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
102Read more on green infrastructure at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/index.cfm.
103 Read the Agenda at http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/gi agenda_protectwaters.pdf.
104 For more information, please see http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm7program id=410.
Office of Water Page 45 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 2008, EPA issued the Vessel General Permit (VGP)105 to provide coverage for
commercial vessels in U.S. waters. EPA intends to finalize the next VGP in FY 2013 with an effective date
of December 19, 2013. The draft VGP, proposed in late 2011, 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. Among
other things, the draft VGP also contains more stringent effluent limits for oil to sea interfaces and
exhaust gas scrubber washwater, which would help prevent adverse environmental impacts due to the
discharge of oils and grease into U.S. waters. EPA has also improved the efficiency of several of the
VGP's administrative requirements, which are expected to reduce confusion in and burden for the
regulated industry. In FY 2014, EPA intends to engage industry, U.S. states, and international partners in
outreach activities, develop implementation strategies, and begin developing the scientific and technical
information needed to promulgate the third generation VGP. EPA also plans to finalize the Small Vessel
General Permit (sVGP) to provide NPDES permit coverage for commercial vessels less than 79 feet in the
event that the P.L.110-299 (extended by subsequent legislation) moratorium on NPDES permitting of
incidental discharges (except ballast water) from fishing vessels (regardless of size) and commercial
vessels less than 79 feet expires on December 18, 2014.
Stormwater106: 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 identified key action items to respond
to these recommendations. A key action item that EPA is undertaking is to revise the national
stormwater program via a rulemakingto improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the
program.
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 TMDL107, 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 2014.
105 For more information, please see http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/vessels/vgpermit.cfm.
106 For more information, please see http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm7program id=6.
107 Read more on the Chesapeake Bay TMDL at http://www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl/.
Office of Water Page 46 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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.
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 frameworkios 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.
Current Permits: EPA will continue to work with states to set targets for the percentage of permits that
are considered current, with the goal of assuring that not less than 90% of all permits are current (see
measure WQ-12).
Pretreatment109: 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: EPA will track and report on key measures of compliance with discharge
permits including the percent of major dischargers in significant noncompliance (SNC), and the percent
of major POTWs that comply with their permitted wastewater discharge standards (see measures WQ-
15 and WQ-16). As part of the CWA Action Plan, in FY 2011, OECA began leading an effort to develop
and implement an improved framework to identify and prioritize the most serious NPDES violations and
align it with appropriate enforcement response recommendations and program performance
expectations. In addition, this effort will identify necessary tools to support the improved framework.
This work will continue in FY 2014.
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. Where EPA regions review of state-EPA MOAs determines that MOAs might require revision,
updating, or supplementation, states should work cooperatively with EPA regions to identify and
complete appropriate actions. States should also implement recommended significant actions identified
under the EPA/Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) enforcement and compliance "State Review
Framework" process. States should place emphasis on implementing criteria to ensure that priority
permits selected are those offering the greatest benefit to improve water quality. 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 are encouraged to seek opportunities to incorporate efficiency tools, such as trading and linking
108 Read the October 27, 2011 and June 5, 2012 memorandums at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/integratedplans.cfm.
109 Read more on the Pretreatment Program at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/home.cfm7program id=3.
Office of Water Page 47 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
development of WQS, TMDLs, and permits. States are expected to ensure that stormwater permits are
reissued on a timely basis and to strengthen the provisions of municipal separate storm sewer (MS4)
permits as they are reissued to ensure clarity on what is required and so that they are enforceable.
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. States were required to modify their programs to
regulate pesticide discharges by October 31, 2011 and continue implementation through 2014. 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, all states are required to fully comply with that regulation,
including the reporting to EPA of required NPDES data as identified in that regulation or its appendices
for the regulated universes specified in that regulation and by the deadlines identified in that regulation.
OECA has a separate NPM Guidance. States and regions should continue to conduct joint permitting and
enforcement planning as outlined in the OECA NPM Guidance [OECA CWA-09]. In 2014, OECA's NPM
Guidance continues to identify activities for improving enforcement efforts aimed at addressing water
quality impairment through the CWA Action Plan. 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 II.D. NPS pollution110 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. To better understand the effectiveness of various
state NPS programs in reducing or eliminating NPS pollution, EPA coordinated with state partners in FY
2011 to complete a detailed study (A National Evaluation of the Clean Water Act Section 319 Program,
November 2011111) of how states are implementing their CWA Section 319 NPS programs to protect and
restore NPS-impaired waters. As a result of this study and in combination with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) interest, EPA launched several state-EPA workgroups in 2012 to discuss
potential changes to the Section 319 Program. These workgroups informed EPA's deliberation and
drafting of revised Section 319 grant guidelines. EPA finalized the grant guidelines on April 12, 2013.
These revised grant guidelines add emphasis on states identifying their NPS program priorities via
updated NPS Management Programs and provide continued focus on watershed projects to restore
impaired waters with additional consideration of protecting unimpaired waters, including drinking water
sources.
110 Read more on nonpoint source pollution at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/index.cfm.
111 Read the study at http://www.epa.gov/owow/NPS/pdf/319evaluation.pdf.
Office of Water Page 48 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
In addition to developing new 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 2014, 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 2014, states, territories, and tribes will continue to implement their NPS management
programs and should update their NPS management programs if necessary. States and territories will
adhere to the revised "Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories"
(http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/cwact.cfm). Tribes will continue to follow the separate tribal Section
319 guidelines available at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/tribal/index.cfin.
vi. Implement the CWSRF
In 2014, EPA will continue to strengthen administrative oversight of the CWSRF, which provides low
interest loans to help finance wastewater treatment facilities, as well as other water quality projects.
The CWSRF plans to conduct annual reviews of state programs, including annual review trainings for SRF
project officers, as funds are available.
The CWSRF will continue to work with states and communities in 2014 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 HWI112.
For FY 2014, EPA will continue to implement the HWI Action Plan113, including providing support for:
112
113
For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/watershed/index.cfm.
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 49 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Statewide integrated assessments that identify healthy watersheds and assessments of healthy
watershed components that build state capacity to improve protection of healthy watershed aquatic
ecosystems;
• Implementation of coordinated state programs that track and protect healthy watersheds;
• Implementation of strategies at the local level that protect watershed resilience;
• Integration of healthy watersheds protection into core water programs;
• Development of EPA Regional Healthy Watersheds Strategies;
• Continued collaboration with partners including other federal agencies, national state associations,
NGOs, and others; and
• Continued communication on the need to protect healthy watersheds, tools to assist healthy
watersheds efforts, and progress to date.
c. Define Waterbody/Watershed Standards Attainment Goals and Strategies
For some impaired waters, the best path to restoration is the prompt implementation of a waterbody-
specific TMDL or TMDLs. For many waters, however, the best path to restoration will be as part of a
larger, watershed approach that results in completion of TMDLs for multiple waterbodies within a
watershed and the development of a single implementation plan for restoring all the impaired waters in
that watershed. 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 demonstrate how the Watershed
Approach is working by showing a measurable improvement in 330 such watersheds by 2015 (see
measure WQ-SP12.N11). EPA exceeded this target in 2012.
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.
EPA also recognizes that additional impaired waters are not included on state 303(d) lists because the
impairments may not require or be most effectively addressed through development and
implementation of a TMDL. Many of these waters are identified in Categories 4b and 4c of state IRs -
that is, where the impairment is being addressed through other pollution control requirements (4b), or
where the impairment is not caused by a pollutant, per se, but rather by habitat degradation or other
factors (4c). EPA and its partners will continue to work together to ensure that restoration efforts are
focused on these waters as well as those on the 303(d) list, facilitate integration of activities to
incorporate these waters into watershed plans, and identify mechanisms for tracking progress in
restoring them.
In 2002, states identified some 39,503 specific waterbodies as impaired (i.e. not attaining state WQS) on
CWA Section 303(d) impaired waters lists. Although core programs, as described above, provide key
tools for improving these impaired waters, success in restoring the health of impaired waterbodies often
requires a waterbody-specific focus to define the problem and implement specific steps needed to
reduce pollution.
Office of Water Page 50 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 that 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). Several years ago, in an effort to move to an automated
process to report on these measures, EPA did explore options to update the 2002 baseline in ATTAINS;
however, EPA concluded that this option wasn't feasible based on the required level of effort. To reduce
state burden and better utilize ATTAINS to track and serve as the repository for these measures, EPA is
evaluating the baseline and measure of water quality improvement issues, identifying what information
states will need to report to EPA as part of their IRs in order for ATTAINS to be used to track their
progress, as well as evaluating the pros and cons of establishing a fixed versus rolling baseline. After
some initial discussions, EPA will continue to track progress towards restoring impaired waters (WQ-
SP10.N11, WQ-SP11, and WQ-SP12.N11) using the 2002 baseline in the short-term. However, EPA will
allow states to report separately additional accomplishments not on the 2002 baseline. This is a short-
term fix, it is not a long-term solution. EPA is committed to working with partners to develop solutions
that can be implemented in the future.
Development of Measures for Improving Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
Incremental Progress in Restoring Water Quality
EPA has been working with state partners to address concerns that these existing measures do not fully
capture investments in water quality restoration that do not result in achievement of full WQS
attainment. Most waters take years to recover fully, and although incremental improvements represent
progress these are currently not well represented. After working with an EPA/State workgroup on
development of an indicator measure to capture incremental water quality improvements, the Agency
proposes to pilot a measure based on state reporting of statewide survey results. While a number of
states have already begun reporting statewide scale survey results in the IR, the Agency is aiming to
have states establish a baseline for this indicator measure in 2014 by asking states to provide data in the
ATTAINS Statewide Statistical Survey Web Data Entry Tool as part of their FY 2014 IRs. The proposed
Statewide Statistical Survey Pilot Measure is:
Number of states protecting or improving water quality conditions, as demonstrated by
• On average, water quality is improving or at least not degrading (there is no statistically
significant decrease in mean water quality);
• The percentage of waters in good condition is increasing or remaining constant;
• The percentage of waters in poor condition is decreasing or remaining constant.
Based on the pilot results, the Agency will continue to work with the EPA/State Monitoring and
Assessment Partnership (MAP) to decide whether to include this measure in future Guidances.
2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
Estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans are among the most productive ecosystems on earth114. For FY
2014, EPA's national strategy for improving the condition of coastal and ocean waters will include the
key elements identified below:
114 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 51 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Maintain coastal monitoring and assessment;
• Support state coastal protection programs;
• Implement the National Estuary Program (NEP); and
• Protect ocean resources.
Coastal and Ocean Waters Activities for FY2014
1) Coastal Monitoring and Assessment. EPA has made improved monitoring of water quality
conditions115 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 waters116. In FY
2014, EPA will publish the NCCR V. Building on coastal condition assessment reports issued in 2001,
2004, and 2008, the NCCR V 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.
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).
In FY 2014, EPA will continue to coordinate with states interested in establishing "no discharge zones"
(NDZ) to control vessel sewage. Under the CWA, where a "state determines that the protection and
enhancement of the quality of some or all of the waters within such State require greater environmental
protection, such State may completely prohibit the discharge from all vessels of any sewage"; however,
no such prohibition shall apply until EPA determines that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary
removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for such water to which such
prohibition would apply. If a state applies and EPA determines that adequate facilities exist, a NDZ may
be established. EPA has worked with states to establish NDZs in the past and will continue to coordinate
with states to control vessel sewage in FY 2014. This process will include answering any questions or
concerns regarding establishment of an NDZ, and providing states with guidance on NDZ applications to
allow for adequate EPA review.
3) Implement NEP117. The overall health of the Nation's estuarine ecosystems depends on the
protection and restoration of high-quality habitat. NEP is a local, stakeholder-driven, and collaborative
program that protects and restores the water quality and ecological integrity of estuaries of national
significance. The goals and objectives of each of the NEPs are identified in their Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs). The NEP is comprised of 28 estuaries along the east,
west, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean coasts. During FY 2014, EPA will continue supporting the NEPs'
implementation of their individual CCMPs.
4) Ocean Protection Programs. The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), also
known as the Ocean Dumping Act, prohibits the ocean dumping of material that would unreasonably
degrade or endanger human health or the marine environment. EPA is responsible for issuing ocean
dumping permits (special, general, research or emergency) 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
115 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/index.cfm.
116 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/assessmonitor/nccr/index.cfm
117 Read more on NEPs at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/nep/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 52 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
of Engineers (USAGE), using EPA's environmental criteria and subject to EPA's concurrence. EPA is also
responsible for designating and managing recommended ocean dumping sites for all types of materials.
All ocean dumping sites are required to have a site management and monitoring plan.
EPA entered into an IA in September 2012 with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) to support EPA's ocean dumping monitoring program. The IA will help support EPA's
implementation of the MPRSA by enabling EPA scientists to conduct ocean dump site monitoring using
NOAA vessels. In addition, EPA is using contract vessels, and through an IA with USAGE, USAGE vessels to
conduct ocean dump site monitoring. EPA will explore the use of University-National Oceanographic
Laboratory System (UNOLS) vessels for FY 2014 surveys.
EPA and USAGE will focus on improving how disposal of dredged material is managed, including
designating and monitoring disposal sites, involving local stakeholders in planning to reduce the need for
dredging, and increasing the beneficial use of dredged material.
One of the greatest threats to U.S. ocean waters and ecosystems is the uncontrolled spread of invasive
species. A principal way invasive species are introduced or spread in U.S. waters is through the discharge
of ballast water from ships. In FY 2014, EPA will continue to work with other agencies on ballast water
discharge standards or controls (both through the EPA's VGP and coordination with U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) regulatory efforts under the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act as
amended), and participate in activities with other nations for effective international management of
ballast water.
In July of 2008, Congress passed the Clean Boating Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-228) amending the CWA to
provide that no NPDES permits shall be required under the CWA for discharges incidental to the normal
operation of recreational vessels. Instead, the Clean Boating Act directs EPA to establish management
practices and associated standards of performance for such discharges (except for vessel sewage, which
is already regulated by the CWA). EPA is developing those regulations.
Support Evaluation of Sub-seabed and Ocean Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide: EPA will work with
other agencies and the international community to provide technical assistance on sub-seabed carbon
sequestration and coordinate with federal partners in addressing proposals for carbon sequestration in
the sub-seabed or other proposals, such as potential fertilization of the ocean, including any applicable
permitting that may be required under the MPRSA or the UIC program.
"Climate Ready Estuaries"118: EPA will continue to build capacity within NEP to adapt to the changes
from climate change on the coasts. EPA will provide additional assistance to individual NEPs to support
their work to develop adaptation plans for their study areas or technical assistance to support
implementation of those plans. Climate Ready Estuaries will continue to improve resources for NEPs and
other coastal communities working to adapt to climate change.
Coastal and Ocean Waters Program Measures
• CO-222.N11 tracks the national coastal condition score from the national baseline score of 3.0 in the
FY 2012 NCCR IV.
• CO-432.N11 tracks the number of habitat acres protected or restored within NEP study areas.
• CO-SP20.N11 tracks the percent of active ocean dredged material disposal sites that have achieved
environmentally acceptable conditions (as reflected in each site's management plan and measured
through on-site monitoring programs).
• CO-02 tracks total coastal and noncoastal statutory square miles protected by NDZs.
118 Read on Climate Ready Estuaries at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/oceb/cre/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 53 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• 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 Program119 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 2014
No Net Loss. EPA contributes to achieving no overall net loss of wetlands through the wetlands
regulatory program established under CWA Section 40412°. 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 also support states that decide to explore assumption of the CWA Section 404 permitting
program from the USAGE. In 2014, 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. 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. In FY 2014, EPA will continue to track the
effectiveness of EPA's environmental review of CWA Section 404 permits (see measure WT-03). 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
119 Read more on wetlands at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/wetlands/index.cfm.
120 Read more on CWA Section 404 at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/cwa/dredgdis/.
Office of Water Page 54 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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. Opportunities to leverage and complement such activities will take on greater
priority in EPA, making possible greater gains in wetland protection and restoration as these
programs are better coordinated. Emphasis will be placed on restoration of wetlands in the Gulf of
Mexico states and in states affected by Superstorm Sandy, as well as on projects increasing the
resiliency of wetlands to climate change and enhancing the ecologic services associated with
wetland systems.
For FY 2014, 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 Programs121: 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. CWA Section 404
requires a permit from USAGE, or an EPA-approved state, for the discharge of dredged or fill material
into waters of the U.S. 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 OMBIL122 Regulatory Module (ORM2).
Using ORM 2.0 and DARTER as a data source, measure WT-03 documents the annual percentage of 404
standard permits where EPA coordinated with the permitting authority and that coordination resulted in
an environmental improvement in the final permit decision.
Wetland Monitoring123: In 2006, EPA issued "The Elements of a State Wetlands Monitoring and
Assessment Program" to assist EPA and state program managers in planning and implementing a
wetland monitoring and assessment program within their broader water quality monitoring efforts.
Since that time, EPA has worked with states and tribes to advance wetlands monitoring and the use of
assessment data to better manage wetland resources. EPA chairs the National Wetlands Monitoring and
Assessment Work Group, comprised of more than 35 states and tribes along with other federal
121 For more information, please see http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/wetlands/estp.cfm.
122 Operations and Maintenance Business Information Link (OMBIL)
123 Read more on wetland monitoring at http://water.epa.gov/tvpe/wetlands/assessment/index.cfm.
Office of Water Page 55 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
agencies, to provide national leadership in implementing state and tribal wetlands monitoring
strategies. The Work Group played a prominent role in informing the design of the NWCA. The NWCA
will provide the first statistically valid assessment of the ecological condition of the Nation's wetlands,
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 was
concluded in 2011, and data review is underway and the final NWCA report is expected in 2014.
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. States should also have plans to
eventually document trends in wetland condition over time. Progress by states in developing their
monitoring capacity is tracked in measure WT-02a124. 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).
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-02a125 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 program126 is to restore and maintain the environmental integrity of the
Great Lakes ecosystem, as mandated by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)127, the Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement, and CWA. As the primary means of accomplishing this goal, EPA leads the
Interagency Task Force in implementation of the FY 2010 to FY 2014 GLRI Action Plan128. 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.
124 In December 2011, the Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds (OWOW) decided to suspend use of
measure WT-04 inFY 2013 because measure WT-02a essentially reports the same activity.
125 In December 2011, OWOW decided to suspend use of measure WT-2b in FY 2013. Measure WT-02b will be
deferred to the future after a good number of state programs have adopted the full program. At that point, OWOW
will replace WT-02a with WT-02b, or will develop a new replacement measure.
126 For more information, please see http://epa. gov/greatlakes/.
127 For more information, please see http://epa.gov/greatlakes/glri/index.html.
128 For more information, please see http://glri.us/pdfs/glri actionplan.pdf
Office of Water Page 56 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Great Lakes Activities for FY2014
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 priority 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 2014 are described below.
Prevention and Reduction of Toxics. EPA, in conjunction with federal, state, tribal, and local
government partners (as well as non-governmental organizations and academia) will take steps to
mitigate the use and release of toxic substances into the Great Lakes. EPA will issue grants to address
chemicals of emerging concern and other pollutants (such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) or
mercury).
Areas of Concern (AOC) Restoration. EPA and the USFWS will issue grants to states, tribes, and other
stakeholders to remove Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) in AOCs. EPA, USFWS, USAGE, U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), and NOAA are working together to accelerate action at several AOCs where delisting is
within reach. Through the Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA), sediment remediation projects will begin and
will be supplemented with navigational channel dredging by USAGE and habitat enhancements by
USFWS.
Invasive Species. GLRI has supported priority Asian carp work including the installation of structures by
USAGE at the electric barrier site to reduce the risk of bypass by Asian carp and USFWS and Illinois
Department of Natural Resource efforts to detect and remove Asian Carp from the system. As needed,
GLRI will invest in additional efforts to keep Asian carp from becoming established in the Great Lakes.
DOT's Maritime Administration, the USCG, and EPA will fund development of ballast water treatment
systems for use in freshwater ecosystems. Further, USFS and USFWS will deploy portable boat washing
units to limit the spread of invasive species by recreational boaters. EPA and USFWS will continue to
conduct monitoring surveys that will detect new invaders in Great Lakes locations. USFWS and the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) will support on-the-ground implementation of Aquatic Nuisance Species
Management Plans for Great Lake states and tribes, which includes conducting rapid response exercises
to demonstrate and refine multi-agency response capabilities. NRCS, USFS, and National Park Service
(NPS) will work with agricultural producers and other landowners to implement practices that reduce
terrestrial invasive species. Activities of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission and USAGE will advance sea
lamprey control and reduction. EPA will issue competitive grants to communities and organizations to
reduce or control terrestrial invasive species.
Identification and Remediation of Sources of Impairments. NRCS, USFS, USAGE, NPS, USGS, NOAA, and
EPA will collaborate to: enhance or implement practices to reduce nearshore impairments and their
causal agents, including the export of nutrients and soils to the nearshore waters; and establish and
implement TMDL and Watershed Action Plans for phosphorus and other non-toxic pollutants. The
agencies will focus primarily on priority sub-watersheds of three geographic watersheds highlighted in
the GLRI Action Plan: Maumee River, Lower Fox River/Green Bay, and Saginaw River.
Enhanced Public Health Protection at Beaches. To assist local health officials in better protecting beach-
goers, EPA and partner agencies will implement actions to reduce, manage, or eliminate sources of
bacterial, algal, or chemical contamination that have been identified through, or are consistent with,
sanitary surveys at Great Lakes beaches.
Protection and Restoration of Native Species and Habitats. Agencies will implement protection and
restoration actions to improve habitat and restore wildlife. Federal agencies, including USAGE, BIA, EPA,
Office of Water Page 57 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), USFWS, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, NOAA, NPS, NRCS,
USFS, USGS, and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service will continue to implement projects to
reduce sedimentation and nutrient inputs, restore natural hydrological regimes, improve water quality,
and protect and restore habitat including islands, beaches, sand dunes, and upland areas.
Improvement of Aquatic Ecosystem Resiliency. USFS, USFWS, USGS, USAGE, FHWA, BIA, and NPS will
begin implementation of projects to remove large woody debris in floodplains and streams, replace
barrier culverts to restore fish passage and stream/river connectivity, and restore forested edges in
riparian areas.
Evaluation of Program Effectiveness and the Health of the Great Lakes Ecosystem Using the Best
Available Science. EPA will work with all GLRI agencies to continue implementation of the Great Lakes
Accountability System to incorporate transparency and accountability throughout GLRI. Federal agencies
will improve existing programs that assess the physical, biological, and chemical integrity of the Great
Lakes. EPA will continue to implement the Coordinated Science and Monitoring Initiative with other
federal agencies, state agencies, and Environment Canada to address lake-specific science and
monitoring needs in Lake Erie in 2014 (to be followed by Lakes Michigan, Superior, Huron, and Ontario
in consecutive years). EPA and USGS will continue to develop the necessary infrastructure for uniform
data quality management and timely access to information.
Enhanced Communication, Partnerships, and Outreach. EPA and NOAA will work to improve Great
Lakes literacy and increase environmental stewardship. EPA will lead and support coordination and
collaboration among Great Lakes partners to ensure that GLRI actions, projects, and programs are
efficient, effective, and consistent with the US-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Through
the newly created Great Lakes Advisory Board, EPA and other federal agencies will seek advice on
annual priorities of the GLRI. The Department of State will support the Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement through cooperative efforts with Canadian partners on issues of binational importance.
Partnerships will be advanced and resources and capabilities leveraged through existing collaborative
efforts such as the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and its Regional Working Group, the US-Canada
Binational Executive Committee, the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference, Lakewide Action and
Management Plans, the Coordinated Science Monitoring Initiative and Great Lakes Fisheries
management. Based on Lakewide Action and Management Plans, partner agencies will implement
programs and projects, using public/oro to assist with the transfer and dissemination of information.
Great Lakes Performance Measures
The Great Lakes Program has a suite of 13 measures. Please see pages 5 and 6 of Appendix A.
2. The Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP)129 is a unique regional partnership that has coordinated and
conducted the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay since 1983. EPA is the lead federal agency on the
Chesapeake Executive Council (EC). In addition to the EPA Administrator, the EC consists of the
governors of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, the mayor of the District of Columbia, the chair of
CBC, and for the past few years, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Governors of New York, West
Virginia, and Delaware have been invited to participate.
Chesapeake Bay Activities for FY2014
EPA's focus in FY 2014 will be to continue progress to restore the Bay's water quality by reducing
loadings of phosphorous, nitrogen, and sediment to achieve the President's expectations as described in
129 Read more on the CBP at http://www.epa.gov/region3/chesapeake/ and http://www.chesapeakebav.net/.
Office of Water Page 58 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Executive Order 13508. The focus will be to continue implementing the Chesapeake Bay TMDL,
considering necessary regulations, providing states with the tools necessary for effective regulatory
implementation, creating better tools for scientific analysis and accountability, and supporting
regulatory compliance and enforcement.
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 under Executive Order 13508, including: implementing the TMDL; assisting
states in implementing their Phase II Watershed Implementation Plans and conducting evaluations of
them for reasonable assurance; maintaining enhanced oversight of state permitting and compliance
actions for the various sectors; providing a model program for states with best practices for
septic/onsite systems; expanding and improving a publicly accessible TMDL tracking and accountability
system; deploying technology to integrate discrete Bay data systems and to present the data in an
accessible accountability system called ChesapeakeStat; and moving forward on the Bay's challenges
related to toxic contaminants.
To ensure the most effective and cost-efficient achievement of environmental results in the Bay, the
CBP partnership is using independent program performance evaluation to critically review components
of the CBP and support enhanced adaptive management efforts. EPA also established two-year
milestones for the outcomes outlined in the Executive Order strategy. The first set of two-year
milestones was released in January 2012 and covers calendar years 2012 and 201313°.
In FY 2014, 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.
In FY 2014, EPA also will continue the development and potential implementation of new national
regulations that include provisions and actions that will help protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay. In
addition to many other impacts, these potential national rulemakings under CWA will reduce nitrogen,
phosphorus, and sediment pollution from CAFOs and other pollutant discharges. EPA will use its
resources to develop the scientific underpinnings of any new national regulations, which could include
enhanced understanding of the loads contributed by various pollution sources in specific geographic
areas.
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 also is participating in the federal Environmental Markets Team, which includes more than 12
agencies working together to foster the expansion of water quality trading and other environmental
markets.
130 The milestones related to water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed are available at
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/documents/ecbrief/18163/chesbay_2012-13_milestones_fact_sheets.pdf and at
http://executiveorder.chesapeakebav.net/EO 13508 Water Quality Milestones-2012-01-06.pdf.
Office of Water Page 59 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 which 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 that ensures a high level of accountability for the
use of these resources. These grants are an essential part of achieving the goals established for the
Chesapeake Bay and its watershed.
EPA's CBP is committed to a high level of accountability and transparency with the public and other key
stakeholders. ChesapeakeStat is a key element in the next generation of tools that EPA is developing to
significantly enhance the accountability of program partners. ChesapeakeStat is a web based, geo-
enabled tool for performance-based interactive decision-making for all Bay partners. The system allows
the public to track progress and become informed and engaged in restoring the Bay. In FY 2014, the
Agency will continue refining and improving ChesapeakeStat by better integrating monitoring and
modeling data to track implementation of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL at multiple geographic scales. The
CBP's Goal Implementation Teams are responsible for providing and updating content, and the
Management Board uses ChesapeakeStat for decision-making.
To ensure that the Bay jurisdictions are effectively implementing the TMDL, EPA will improve and
expand the Bay Tracking and Accountability System. EPA will support an expansion of sampling sites in
the CBP's water quality monitoring network to better track TMDL progress. The sampling sites will
provide better measurements of nutrient and sediment load changes for major sources of pollution in
more localities. 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 2014, 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. EPA's multi-
year, multi-state 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-SP33.N11 is a long term measure tracking submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in the Bay.
• CB-SP34 tracks dissolved oxygen (DO) in the Bay.
• CB-SP35, CB-SP36, and CB-SP37 track nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment reduction in the Bay.
3. The Gulf of Mexico
The Gulf of Mexico basin131 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.
131 Read more on the Gulf of Mexico Program at http ://www. epa. gov/gmpo/.
Office of Water Page 60 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Gulf of Mexico Activities for FY 2014
Conserve and Restore Habitat. 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 50%, and
protection of the critical habitat that remains is essential to the health of the Gulf aquatic system. EPA
has a goal of restoring 30,600 cumulative acres of habitat by FY 2014 and is working with the NOAA,
environmental organizations, the Gulf of Mexico Foundation, and area universities to identify and
restore critical habitat. EPA will enhance cooperative planning and programs across the Gulf states and
federal agencies to protect wetland and estuarine habitat.
EPA and the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, Habitat Conservation and Restoration Team, have worked
extensively with the five Gulf states to develop and implement a Gulf Regional Sediment Management
Master Plan that endorses best practices for sediment management, outlines technical considerations,
and recommends solutions for the most beneficial use of this resource (i.e. dredged material). The
"Technical Framework" document has been developed and is posted for review.132
Over the next several years, the Gulf states will establish criteria for nutrients in coastal ecosystems that
will guide regulatory, land use, and water quality protection decisions. In FY 2014, EPA will support
coastal nutrient criteria and standards development with Gulf state pilots and will develop science and
management tools for the characterization of nutrients in coastal ecosystems.
EPA, in cooperation with states and other federal agencies, supports the long-term target to reduce the
size of the hypoxic zone from approximately 17,350 square kilometers to less than 5,000 square
kilometers, measured as a five-year running average. In working to accomplish this goal, EPA, states, and
other federal agencies, such as USDA, will continue implementation of core clean water programs and
partnerships and efforts to coordinate allocation of technical assistance and funding to priority areas
around the Gulf.
Specifically in FY 2014, EPA will address excessive nutrient loadings that contribute to water quality
impairments in the basin and, ultimately, to hypoxic conditions in the Gulf of Mexico. Working with the
Gulf Hypoxia Task Force, Gulf of Mexico Alliance and other states within the Mississippi/Atchafalaya
River Basins, other federal agencies, and the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, EPA will help
develop and implement nutrient reduction strategies that include an accountability framework for point
and NPSs contributing nitrogen and phosphorus loading to the Gulf, as well as watershed plans that
provide a road map for addressing NPSs. EPA will continue to coordinate with USDA and with federal
and state partners to support monitoring BMPs and water quality improvement through work with the
partner organizations and states and to leverage resources to focus wetland restoration and
development and habitat restoration efforts towards projects within the Mississippi River Basin that will
sequester nutrients as appropriate from targeted watersheds and tributaries.
EPA's long-term goal is to increase awareness and stewardship of Gulf coastal resources and promote
action among Gulf citizens. In 2014, the Gulf of Mexico Program will foster regional stewardship and
awareness of Gulf coastal resources through annual Gulf Guardian Awards; and will support initiatives
that include direct involvement from underserved and underrepresented populations and enhance local
capacity to reach these populations.
Restore Water Quality. 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
132 http://www.gulfofmexicoalliance.org/pdfs/GRSMMP Technical Framework Dec 09.pdf
Office of Water Page 61 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
region. These efforts will assure the continued effective implementation of core clean water programs,
ranging from discharge permits, to nonpoint pollution controls, to wastewater treatment, to protection
of wetlands. The Gulf of Mexico Program is working with NOAA, USAGE, and USGS in support of this
goal.
A central pillar of the strategy to restore the health of the Gulf is restoration of water quality and habitat
in priority coastal watersheds. These watersheds, which include impaired segments identified by states
around the Gulf, will receive targeted technical and financial assistance to restore impaired waters. The
FY 2014 goal is to fully attain WQSs in at least 360 of these segments.
Enhance Community Resilience. In FY 2014, EPA 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. EPA is working collaboratively with
multiple agencies that share responsibility in this area, including NOAA Sea Grant Programs and USGS in
support of this goal.
Gulf of Mexico Performance Measures
• GM-SP38 tracks restored segments in 13 priority areas in the Gulf.
• GM-SP39 tracks cumulative 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.
4. Long Island Sound
The Long Island Sound Study (LISS)133 supports, and is supported, by the EPA core environmental
management and regulatory control programs, as well as one of the Administrator's key priorities -
urban waters. Long Island Sound (LIS) itself is known as the "Urban Sea,"134 because of its proximity in
the Northeast population corridor and its vulnerability to the impacts of human usage. All of
Connecticut's 24 coastal towns are urbanized, as are Westchester, Queens, Nassau, and Suffolk counties
in New York that border the Sound. The CCMP, established under CWA Section 320, envisioned a
partnership of federal, state and local governments, private industry, academia and the public, to
support and fund 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 2014
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, academia, industry, and the
private sector - to implement the 1994 CCMP to restore and protect the Sound. Because levels of DO
are critical to the health of aquatic life and viable public use of the Sound, a CCMP priority is controlling
anthropogenic nitrogen discharges to meet these WQS. Activities for FY 2014 include:
• LISS partners are revising the CCMP and will sign a new document in 2014 based on an Action
Agenda135 that identifies priority actions from 2011 to 2013.
• The EPA Long Island Sound Office will continue to work with the five watershed states (Connecticut,
New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont) to implement the nitrogen TMDL first
approved by EPA in April 2001 and develop a revised TMDL.
133 Read more on LISS at http://longislandsoundstudv.net/.
134 L.Koppelman, The Urban Sea: Long Island Sound, 1976; ISBN 0-275-28863-8
135 The Action Agenda is available at http://longislandsoundstudy.net/about/our-mission/sound-agreements/action-agenda-
2011-2013A
Office of Water Page 62 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 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. Residents and governments on
both sides of the international border share a commitment to steward the ecosystem's resources. 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 EPA's Puget Sound Program136 works to ensure that the
natural, cultural, and economic benefits of the Puget Sound ecosystem are protected and sustained,
today and into the future. The Puget Sound basin represents the largest population and commercial
center in the Pacific Northwest and the waters of Puget Sound provide a vital system of international
ports, transportation systems, and defense installations.
Puget Sound Activities for FY 2014
Activities in FY2014 are being carried out by stakeholders across Puget Sound including local
governments, counties and municipalities, tribes, and state agencies. The EPA Puget Sound Program is
emphasizing implementation of near term actions that support the three Strategic Initiatives described
in the 2012 revision of the Puget Sound Action Agenda137: prevention of pollution from urban
stormwater runoff; protection and restoration of habitat; and recovery of shellfish beds. Specific actions
include:
Pollution prevention from urban stormwater
• Expand stormwater facility retrofits and effective stormwater source control programs in areas of
existing development.
• Accelerate the shift in stormwater management from traditional approaches to low impact
development (LID) approaches by funding additional LID demonstration projects, particularly in
urban areas with good public visibility and high return-on-investment potential.
• Initiate programs to prevent toxics from entering Puget Sound with a focus on persistent
bioaccumulative toxics (e.g., PCBs and PAHs) and chemicals of emerging concern (e.g.,
Pharmaceuticals and personal care products).
Protection and restoration of habitat
• Protect habitat and watershed ecosystem functions by providing grant support to local governments
(counties, cities, special use districts, etc) to improve their land use plans, policies, and regulations.
These efforts will help conserve ecologically significant undeveloped rural and resource lands and
concentrate development within existing urban growth areas.
• Invest in restoration projects that remove marine shoreline modifications in order to improve
habitat and ecosystem processes that sustain Puget Sound.
136 Read more on the Puget Sound Program at http://www.epa.gov/pugetsound/index.html.
137 The Puget Sound Action Agenda is at: http://www.psp.wa.gov/action agenda 2011 update home.php.
Office of Water Page 63 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Develop a marketing and outreach strategy aimed at homeowners and landowners along the shores
of Puget Sound, to reduce shoreline hard armoring and determine what will help change the way
landowners manage their shorelines.
Recovery of shellfish beds
• Sustain funding to help local health jurisdictions build capacity to inventory and inspect Onsite
Sewage Systems (OSS) and fix failures to eliminate pathogen pollution from these sources, especially
in areas adjacent to shellfish growing beds.
• Support for the 10 counties with Puget Sound Pollution Identification and Correction (PIC) programs.
These PIC programs have proven success for counties tracking pollution from a variety of sources
and working with landowners to correct problems through technical assistance and incentives
backed by enforcement.
• Provide direct grants and technical assistance (targeting small non-regulated agricultural operations)
to help landowners implement agricultural BMPs to reduce pathogen and nutrient pollution from
livestock, especially in areas adjacent to shellfish growing beds. Completion of the petition to
establish a NDZ to prohibit recreational and commercial vessels from discharging sewage in Puget
Sound and improves pump out capacity and use.
• Provide funding and technical resources to support the Washington State Department of Ecology's
Pollution Control Action Team (PCAT) - who together with the Washington State Department of
Health, Washington State Department of Agriculture, EPA, and tribes, are responding quickly when
areas are identified where water quality problems threaten shellfish areas.
Tribal projects
In FY 2014, EPA is ensuring that appropriated funding is effectively used to address priority habitat
restoration and protection, with particular emphasis on salmon and shellfish areas, so that the inherent
tribal rights associated with these natural resources are protected.
EPA Region 10 co-chairs the overall federal effort to address Treaty Rights at Risk,138 consistent with the
roles assigned by the Council on Environmental Quality.
EPA continues to build on its strong tribal partnerships through implementation of its commitments in
the Federal Habitat Plan and through the Tribal-Federal Habitat Forum. The outcomes from many tribal
projects funded by EPA's lead organization award to the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission are in
support of the Federal Habitat Plan goals; examples include:
• monitoring species status and trend to determine habitat restoration and protection efficacy;
• acquiring property to protect ecosystem processes and key habitat in perpetuity; and
• engaging in design, planning, and coordination work to best advise what restoration practices will
confer the greatest benefit considering limited financial resources.
Tribal Habitat Strategic Initiative
The Puget Sound tribes developed for inclusion in the 2012 Action Agenda, the Tribal Strategic Initiative
that endorses priority action necessary to protect and restore salmon habitat in Puget Sound. The Tribal
Strategic Initiative includes the following key priorities for action:
• Protect the ecosystem processes required to support the habitat necessary to meet salmon recovery
goals of viable, harvestable populations.
138 http://nwifc.0rg/w/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/08/whitepaper628finalpdf.pdf
Office of Water Page 64 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Implement and improve consistency, coordination of enforcement and alignment of federal, state
and local regulations for the protection of priority nearshore, estuary and floodplain habitat.
In FY 2014, new and ongoing actions identified in the initiative will be funded.
The Puget Sound program's tribal funding and other lead organizations' funding also encourage projects
that address the impacts of climate change. For example, the Tulalip Tribe received funding to continue
and expand their monitoring of ecosystem response to climate change impacts in the Snohomish River
Estuary.
The Partnership's Action Agenda recognizes that climate change exacerbates the existing threats to
Puget Sound and it calls for actions that adapt to and mitigate potentially harmful effects. Utilizing a
Washington State Department of Ecology report 139prepared by the Climate Action Group at the
University of Washington, the updated Puget Sound Action Agenda integrates the impacts of climate
change on work being done in Puget Sound with the considerations necessary for decision making now
and in the future. Grant awards made under the Puget Sound program require that applicants consider
climate change and highlight climate-related activities in workplans and performance reports. EPA tracks
climate change activities and outputs in the Puget Sound in its Financial Ecosystem Accounting and
Tracking System (FEATS).
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 of estuarine wetlands restored.
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
140
141
communities in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region . The bi-national agreement that guides efforts to
improve environmental conditions in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region is the Border 2020 framework1
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 NAFTA 142-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 2014
Under the Border 2020 Plan, EPA expects to take the following key actions to improve water quality and
protect public health.
Core Program Implementation: EPA will continue to implement core programs under the CWA and
related authorities, ranging from discharge permit issuance, to watershed restoration, to nonpoint
pollution control. Specific activities to be accomplished in FY 2014 include:
139 The report is available at http://www.ecv.wa.gov/climatechange/ipa responsestrategv.htm.
140 Read more on the U.S.-Mexico Border Program at http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/ and
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/wastewater/mexican/index.cfm.
141 Read more on Border 2020 at http://www.epa. gov/border2020/framework/index.html.
142 North American Free Trade Agreement
Office of Water Page 65 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Complete BECC/NADB Board project certifications.
• Complete construction of Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF) projects.
• Incorporate sustainable infrastructure elements into selected certified projects.
• Conduct energy efficiency and water conservation audits at selected border drinking water and
wastewater utilities to improve sustainability of the infrastructure
Drinking Water and Wastewater Treatment Financing: In FY 2014, EPA plans to provide approximately
$10 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.
U.S.-Mexico Border Program Measures
The FY 2014 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.143
Pacific Island Territories Activities for FY 2014
• In American Samoa, the local utility will use EPA funding to make its central water system safer, and
to extend water from the central system to remote villages which currently use untreated wells or
streams as their water source. The utility will also use EPA funding to improve its sewage collection
and treatment system.
• 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
143Read more on EPA's work in the Pacific Islands at http://www.epa.gov/region9/islands/.
Office of Water Page 66 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
agricultural operations and a continually expanding population. The EPA's South Florida Geographic
Initiative (SFGI)144 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)145; WQPPforthe Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS); the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI), directed
by the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force; the Brownfields Program; and a number of other waste management
programs.
South Florida Activities for FY 201'4
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.
• 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 overtime. Program data have been used by over 20
state and federal agencies, Indian tribes, agricultural interests, environmental groups, and the
National Academy of Sciences. Planning efforts are underway to resume field sampling in FY 2013
and FY 2014.
• 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 I/VQPP.14S The FKNMS and Protection Act of 1990/1992 congressionally directed EPA
and the State of Florida, in consultation with NOAA, to develop a WQPP to address water quality and
protect corals, fish, shellfish and recreational opportunities within the Sanctuary. In FY 2014, EPA will
continue to
• Implement the WQPP for the FKNMS, including the comprehensive monitoring projects (coral reef,
seagrass, and water quality), special studies, data management, and public education and outreach
activities (see measures SFL-SP45, SFL-SP46, SFL-47a and SFL-47b).
• Support implementation of wastewater and storm water master plans for the Florida Keys to
upgrade inadequate wastewater and storm water infrastructure by 2015 (see measure SFL-1).
• Assist with implementing the comprehensive plan for eliminating sewage discharges from boats and
other vessels.
Support the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)
• 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
144Read more on SFGI at http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/southflorida/index.html.
145Read more on CERP at http://www.evergladesplan.org/about/aboutcerp brief, aspx.
146Read more on FKNMS at see http://ocean.floridamarine.org/fknms wqpp/pages/wqpp.html.
Office of Water Page 67 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
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 Actions of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force
In March 2000, the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force147 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 2014, EPA and states will:
• Continue support for the Coral Reef Environmental Monitoring Program within the FKNMS.
• Support SEFCRI as funding becomes available.
Other Priority Activities for FY 2014
• Continue to support Florida and the South Florida Water Management District TMDL and
Reasonable Assurance restoration activities in the Everglades and Florida Keys. EPA proposed TMDLs
for the South Florida coast in November 2012, expects finalization of TMDLs in March 2013, and
anticipates completion of the TMDL consent decree in FY 2014.
• Complete Mote Marine Laboratory special study "Assess the effects of mosquito control pesticides
on non-targeted organisms 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.
• Completion of the Monroe County Keys-wide Canal Management Master Plan to assist Monroe
County and water resource agencies with future canal management and restoration efforts.
Implementation of the plan will help to protect and restore water quality and habitat in the canals,
improve dissolved oxygen and reduce discharges of nutrients to offshore waters.
• 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 2014, 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 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.
• 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-48 tracks phosphorus levels discharged into and within the Everglades.
147Read more on the Coral Reef Task Force at http://www.coralreef.gov/about/docs.html.
Office of Water Page 68 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
• Measure SFL-1 tracks wastewater and stormwater implementation activities in the Keys.
9. The Columbia River Basin
The Columbia River Basin148 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.
Columbia River Basin Activities for FY2014
A November 2012 Columbia River Toxics Reduction Executive Meeting which included executive leaders
from tribal, state, and federal governments, and non-profits identified six priority areas of focus for
implementation attention in 2013 and beyond. These implementation teams will be led by various
entities and will provide leadership in accomplishing actions in these six areas:
• Sustainable Purchasing: Develop guidance for governmental agencies in the basin to establish and
implement low toxicity purchasing guidelines (chaired by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality),
• Green Chemistry: Help establish a Regional Green Chemistry Center to develop chemicals and
processes that provide less toxic materials (chaired by EPA).
• 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 has established several goals for improving environmental conditions in the Columbia
River basin by 2014:
• Measure CR-SP53. Clean up 85 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 in five sites where baseline data is available.
148 Read more on the Columbia River Basin at http://www.epa.gov/columbiariver/.
Office of Water Page 69 of 70
-------
FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
10. The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary
The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary (Bay Delta)149 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 Plan150 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 Fund151.
San Francisco Bay Delta Activities for FY 2014
• 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 Program152, 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 Planning153
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 CCMP154 by
reducing adverse effects of urban/suburban runoff on water quality - through watershed planning,
implementation of TMDLs, and the use of LID and green infrastructure155.
• Continuing to administer the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund156.
149 Read more on the Bay Delta at http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta.
150 Read more on the Bay Delta Action Plan at http://www2.epa. gov/sfbav-delta/bav-delta-action-plan.
151 Read more on the Bay Area Water Projects at http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta/bav-area-water-projects.
152 Read more at http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/planning/climate change/estuary.shtml.
153 Read the Handbook at http://www.water.ca.gov/climatechange/CCHandbook.cfm.
154 Read the CCMP at http://sfep.sfei.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/2007-CCMP.pdf.
155 Read more on LID at http ://water. epa. gov/polwaste/green/.
156 Read more on Bay Area water projects at http://www2.epa.gov/sfbav-delta/bav-area-water-projects.
Office of Water Page 70 of 70
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
Goal 2 Protecting America's Waters
Subobjective 2.1.1 Water Safe to Drink
SDW-211
SDW-
SP1.N11
SDW-SP2
SDW-
SP3.N11
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.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY2012 UNIVERSE (in millions)
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of community water systems that meet all applicable
health-based standards through approaches that include effective
treatment and source water protection.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2012 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2012 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of the population in Indian country served by community
water systems that receive drinking water that meets all
applicable health-based drinking water standards.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2012 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
OMB PA
BUD
SG
ARRA
92%
92%
92.0%
94.7%
91%
93.2%
91.4%
89%
300,660,601
91%
89.8%
94.7%
89.4%
93.2%
91.4%
89%
300,660,601
90%
89%
94%
89%
91%
91.3%
92.5%
15,075,985
80%
80%
90%
78%
84%
82.4%
55.3%
31,746,186
90%
90%
92%
90%
89%
96.6%
93.2%
25,759,503
92%
92%
96%
92%
96%
94.2%
93%
58,885,811
94%
94%
97%
94%
96%
93.2%
94.1%
43,265,858
88%
85%
92%
85%
91%
90.3%
87.8%
38,478,029
90%
80%
94%
80%
92%
81.6%
91.2%
12,290,075
92%
91%
94%
91%
94%
93.2%
94.7%
10,803,416
95%
95%
98%
95%
97%
96%
94.6%
52,545,562
93%
92%
98%
91%
97%
92.2%
94.8%
11,810,176
The universe represents the population served by community water systems. The National commitment for FY13 is higher than the regional aggregate commitment to be
consistent with the FY13 budget target.
OMB PA
BUD
SG
SP
90%
90%
91%
91%
90%
90.7%
89.6%
89%
51,870
89%
91%
91%
87.8%
90.7%
89.6%
89%
51,870
85%
90%
90%
83%
85%
84.8%
85.7%
2,716
85%
88%
88%
83%
87%
85%
86.4%
3,673
91%
92%
92%
87%
93%
91%
91.8%
4,467
90%
95%
95%
90.5%
94%
91.7%
91%
8,834
93%
93%
95%
93%
94%
93.9%
92%
7,347
86%
89%
89%
85%
90%
88.8%
86.2%
8,312
85%
88%
88%
85%
88%
87.2%
86.8%
4,109
90%
89%
89%
90%
90%
89.4%
90.3%
3,311
88%
89%
89%
88%
88%
87.8%
91.6%
4,653
88%
92%
92%
88%
91%
89.6%
87.3%
4,448
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 90%. New measure starting in FY08.
OMB PA
BUD
KPI
95%
95%
95%
97.8%
95%
97.4%
97%
97%
3,088,737,435
95%
94.5%
97.8%
94.1%
97.4%
96.7%
97%
3,088,737,435
94%
94%
98%
94%
97%
98%
96%
180,911,820
93%
93%
95%
90%
95%
93.5%
92%
380,954,232
93%
93%
97%
91%
96%
91%
99%
309,114,036
95%
95%
98%
95%
98%
98.3%
98%
706,629,732
96%
96%
99%
96%
98%
96.6%
96%
519
94%
94%
97%
94%
96%
96.6%
97%
461,736,348
92%
90%
98%
90%
97%
96.9%
98%
147,480,900
95%
95%
98%
95%
97%
98%
99%
129,640,992
98%
98%
99%
98%
99%
98.6%
97%
630,546,744
95%
95%
99%
95%
99%
98.4%
98%
141,722,112
Indicator measure in FY07.
BUD
KPI
SP
87%
87%
87%
84%
87%
81.2%
87.2%
86%
984,236
80%
79%
84%
79.9%
81.2%
87.2%
86%
984,236
90%
90%
100%
90%
100%
100%
100%
90,594
95%
95%
100%
90%
50%
100%
100%
11,071
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 88%. The universe represents the popu
90%
90%
100%
90%
97%
100%
100%
24,935
98%
98%
97%
98%
99%
97.1%
99.5%
118,579
80%
78%
92%
78%
87%
89.9%
90.4%
80,798
85%
80%
83%
80%
87%
83.3%
86.5%
5,394
87%
87%
86%
87%
86%
90%
82.6%
106,001
70%
70%
74%
70%
70%
80%
80.9%
494,834
87%
87%
90%
87%
87%
85.5%
88.1%
52,030
ation in Indian country served by community water systems.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 1 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
SDW-SP4a
SDW-SP4b
SDW-
18. Nil
SDW-Ola
SDW-Olb
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
Percent of community water systems where risk to public health
is minimized through source water protection.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2012 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of the population served by community water systems
where risk to public health is minimized through source water
protection.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY2012 UNIVERSE (in millions)
National Program Manager Comments
Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided
access to safe drinking water in coordination with other federal
agencies.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of community water systems (CWSs) that have
undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years (five
years for outstanding performers or those ground water systems
approved by the primacy agency to provide 4-1 og treatment of
viruses).
FY 2013 Baseline
FY 2013 Universe
National Program Manager Comments
Number of tribal community water systems (CWSs) that have
undergone a sanitary survey within the past three years (five
years for outstanding performers or those ground water systems
approved to provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
FY 2013 Baseline
FY 2013 Universe
National Program Manager Comments
OMB PA
BUD
LT
45%
45.0%
43.3%
40%
40.2%
36.8%
20%
51,870
42%
40.1%
41.3%
39.2%
40.2%
37%
20%
51,870
84%
66%
84%
66%
66.3%
65.8%
51%
2,716
70%
61%
61%
61%
61%
61%
30%
3,673
39%
37%
35%
33%
35%
29%
12%
4,467
58%
56%
55%
53%
52%
38%
21%
8,834
41%
39.0%
41.1%
39%
40%
38.8%
19%
7,347
40%
40%
43%
40%
40.9%
40%
19%
8,312
8%
8%
8%
9%
12%
9%
13%
4,109
35%
39.0%
38.3%
39%
45%
38.6%
20%
3,311
10%
10%
10%
10%
9%
8%
1%
4,653
40%
40%
44%
40%
42%
40%
28%
4,448
The universe is the number of community water systems.
SG
57%
57.0%
55.9%
57%
55.2%
52.0%
n/a
300,660,601
56%
55.2%
55.2%
55.1%
55.2%
52%
n/a
300,660,601
97%
96%
97%
96%
95.9%
95.7%
15,075,985
80%
80%
84%
80%
80%
80%
31,746,186
64%
63%
63%
63%
67%
63%
25,759,503
59%
59%
58%
56%
55%
46%
58,885,811
68%
64.0%
68.7%
64%
66%
62%
43,265,858
62%
60%
63%
62%
62.9%
63%
38,478,029
20%
20%
20%
20%
23%
22%
12,290,075
35%
37.0%
38.5%
37%
40%
51.8%
10,803,416
13%
13%
12%
12%
12%
11%
52,545,562
80%
80%
81%
80%
84%
85%
11,810,176
New measure starting in FY08. Note: "Minimized risk" s achieved by the substantial implementation, as determined by the state, of actions in a source water protection strategy.
The universe is the most recent SDWIS nventory of community water systems. The FY 2013 NWPG and ts Appendix erroneously showed the ncorrect commitment for Region 8.
SP
BUD
LT
119,000
119,000
104,266
110,000
97,311
80,900
360,000
New measure for FY11, to supplement SDW-SP5 in the NWPG and replace it in the Strategic Plan. FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 136,100.
OMB PA
BUD
SG
79%
79%
78.7%
49,283
74%
78.7%
49,283
70%
84.9%
2,619
95%
86.9%
3,480
93%
90.0%
4,321
80%
86.4%
8,493
75%
79.9%
7,121
92%
80.0%
7,945
87%
94.3%
3,999
79%
81.2%
3,065
70%
66.6%
4,004
75%
32.0%
4,236
Prior to FY07, this measure tracked states, rather than CWSs, in compliance with this regulation. Universe updated in FY 2014 to reflect the updated universe (FY 2012) and
measure text.
529
518
710
527
518
710
2
3
3
2
7
n/a
n/a
n/a
14
14
14
74
10
70
9
37
51
8
4
9
105
88
109
319
287
366
8
75
81
A sanitary survey is an on-site review of the water sources, facilities, equipment, operation, and maintenance of a publ c 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.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 2 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
SDW-04
SDW-05
SDW-07
SDW-08
SDW-11
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
Fund utilization rate [cumulative dollar amount of loan
agreements divided by cumulative funds available for projects] for
the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE (FY2012, in millions)
National Program Manager Comments
Number of Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) projects
that have initiated operations, (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of Classes 1, 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.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2010 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of Class V motor vehicle waste disposal wells (MVWDW)
and large capacity cesspools (LCC) that are closed or permitted
(cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of DWSRF projects awarded to small PWS serving <500,
501-3,300, and 3,301-10,000 consumers.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
OMB PA
BUD
ARRA
89%
89%
89.0%
89.7%
90%
90%
91.3%
84.7%
$26,379.6
88%
88.5%
90.5%
90%
90%
91.3%
84.7%
$26,379.6
90%
90%
95%
90%
92%
99.1%
78.5%
$2,374.9
90%
90%
92%
90%
94%
98%
93%
$4,643.6
89%
89%
96%
86%
96%
102%
83.3%
$1,563.1
85%
85%
85%
90%
88%
90%
88%
$2,938.5
94%
95%
88%
95%
87.1%
93.2%
87%
$4,568.0
83%
81%
82%
85%
87%
99%
64.5%
$2,776.8
80%
85%
86%
85%
85%
109%
91%
$1,831.4
88%
88%
86%
90%
89%
91.9%
84%
$1,841.9
87%
87%
92%
86%
87%
85%
80%
$2,689.8
95%
95%
103%
98%
101%
104.6%
94.3%
$1,151.5
Universe represents the funds available for projects for the DWSRF through 2007, in millions of dollars i.e., the denominator of the measure .
OMB PA
ARRA
7,171
6,976
6,690
6,080
6,076
5,236
2,611
7,171
6,569
6,721
6,074
6,076
5,236
2,611
984
820
924
795
799
735
320
457
435
453
422
448
410
311
665
595
643
530
575
500
261
825
765
800
625
714
599
369
1,640
1,443
1,346
1,140
1,250
1,066
557
279
262
254
254
227
192
59
633
633
624
608
583
480
229
815
760
814
740
726
591
242
323
306
363
360
308
261
123
550
550
500
600
446
402
140
R9 corrected FY 2012 EOY is 289 (orignally entered at 363 in ACS).
OMB PA
BUD
SG
85%
85%
85%
85%
90%
2,512
73%
87%
85%
84%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
90%
90%
90%
90%
70%
60%
61%
70%
75%
75%
92%
75%
67%
66%
80%
57%
85%
90%
90%
90%
75%
75%
81%
75%
80%
80%
90%
80%
60%
60%
53%
90%
75%
75%
67%
75%
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 1, II and III wells are deep wells and there are many more Class II wells that lose mechanical integrity re ative to Classes 1 and III wells (2,800 compared to 8 for Class 1
and 7 for Class III). The revised measure should improve the numbers in the denominator of the measure.
OMB PA
BUD
25,225
25,225
24,327
25,225
22,650
25,837
25,376
25,225
22,650
2,325
2,320
2,314
1,309
752
700
730
430
4,270
4,255
4,215
3,700
112
110
109
108
4,632
4,322
4,317
4,110
272
273
272
272
142
175
175
175
2,371
2,371
2,331
2,346
3,700
3,650
3,560
3,000
7,261
7,200
7,202
7,200
Measure revised for FY12. The measure ncludes 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 pr ority wells inc uding, at minimum, Large Capacity Cess (LCC) Poo s. Reporting in percentages will not provide good information on progress
in closing or permitting the MVWD wells.
1
Indicator
71%
71%
72%
698
70%
65%
65%
72%
138
66%
68%
75%
44
77%
78%
70%
56
58%
58%
30%
43
72%
71%
72%
126
59%
58%
76%
33
83%
83%
80%
70
82%
82%
87%
87
66%
65%
81%
26
76%
77%
80%
75
New measure starting in FY11.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 3 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
SDW-15
SDW-17
SDW-19a
SDW-19b
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
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 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 Manager Comments
Number and percent of schools and childcare centers that meet
all health-based drinking water standards.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Volume of CO2 sequestered through injection as defined by the
UIC Final Rule.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
Number of permit decisions during the reporting period that
result in CO2 sequestered through injection as defined by the UIC
Final Rule.
FY 20112 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
1
Indicator
1,230
2%
1,337
2.1%
1,904
3%
66,156
1,260
1.9%
85
2%
112
3%
164
4%
4,478
158
3%
184
4%
208
4%
5,189
98
1%
109
2%
113
2%
6,751
130
1%
127
1%
218
2%
9,840
83
1%
85
1%
102
1%
11,261
271
3%
243
3%
394
4%
9,082
143
3%
172
4%
288
6%
4,562
54
1%
71
2%
91
2%
3,690
148
3%
133
2%
154
3%
5,877
90
2%
101
2%
172
3%
5,426
New measure starting in FY11.
1
Indicator
6,991
93%
7,114
92%
7,260
94%
7,664
6,991
91.2%
995
87%
1,017
89%
1,057
92%
1,146
680
92%
708
95%
705
95%
740
1,164
95%
1,188
92%
1,179
96%
1,228
623
86%
647
92%
688
95%
724
1,858
95.7%
1,872
94%
1,933
95%
2,002
327
95%
334
93%
329
95%
345
189
85%
195
89%
197
89%
222
229
96%
236
93%
224
94%
239
519
90%
505
89%
523
90%
578
407
93%
412
92%
425
97%
440
New measure starting in FY11.
1
1
Indicator
40,380.12
TBD
Indicator
0
TBD
Subobjective 2.1.2 Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat
FS-
SP6.N11
FS-la
Percent of women of childbearing age having mercury levels in
blood above the level of concern.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
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 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
BUD
SP
4.9%
4.9%
2.5%
2.3%
4.9%
n/a
5.7%
Updated data are available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention approximately every two years. FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 4.6%.
1
Indicator
n/a
36%
n/a
24%
100%
The FY11 EOY result is based on data from 2009-2010.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 4 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
FS-lb
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
Percent of lake acres where fish tissue were assessed to support
waterbody-specific or regional consumption advisories or a
determination that no consumption advice is necessary. (Great
Lakes measured separately; Alaska not included) (Report every
two years)
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
1
Indicator
n/a
42%
n/a
35%(14M)
100% (40M)
The FY11 EOY result is based on data from 2009-2010.
Subobjective 2.1.3 Water Safe for Swimming
ss-
SP9.N11
SS-1
SS-2
Percent of days of the beach season that coastal and Great Lakes
beaches monitored by state beach safety programs are open and
safe for swimming.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2010 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number and national percent, using a constant denominator, of
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) permits with a schedule
ncorporated into an appropriate enforceable mechanism,
ncluding 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)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2008 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of all Tier 1 (significant) public beaches that are monitored
and managed under the BEACH Act program.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
SG
SP
95%
95.0%
95.2%
95%
96%
95%
96%
752,683
92%
93%
95%
92%
96%
95%
96%
752,683
98%
98%
98%
98%
97.7%
97.2%
98%
86,226
95%
95%
97%
95%
98%
97%
97.2%
90,834
95%
95.0%
98.5%
95%
97.3%
98.2%
98.5%
17,861
92%
92.0%
98.3%
92%
97.7%
97.7%
96.3%
184,609
90%
90.0%
93.5%
88%
92%
94%
95.5%
50,064
90%
85%
90%
80%
91%
91%
93%
28,146
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
88%
90.0%
92.7%
90%
93%
93.1%
95.3%
282,149
85%
95%
93%
95%
99%
95%
92.8%
12,794
Universe changes annually. Universe equals the total number of beach season days associated with the swimming seasons of monitored beaches. FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015
EPAStrategcPlanis95%.
785 (92%)
785 (92%)
748 (88%)
752 (88%)
734 (86%)
724 (85%)
568 (66%)
855
785
785
748
752
734
724
568 (66%)
855
76
76
76
76
76
76
75(91%)
82
78
75
74
74
72
70
51(48%)
108
230
228
226
227
224
221
175(74%)
236
18
18
18
18
18
17
9(38%)
24
340
345
312
315
305
303
232 (64%)
362
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
24
24
23
23
20
18
7(29%)
24
1
1
1
1
1
1
1(100%)
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3(100%)
3
15
15
15
15
15
15
15(100%)
15
Measure revised for FY08. Beginning in FY08, OECA and OWM 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 fa rly stable, the Regional baselines did change.
SG
97%
97%
100%
95%
100%
97%
97%
100%
97%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
90%
85%
100%
85%
100%
85%
95%
100%
93%
100%
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 5 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2010 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
97%
99.1%
96.5%
2,171
97%
99.1%
96.5%
2,171
100%
100%
100%
130
100%
100%
100%
394
100%
100%
100%
84
100%
100%
100%
472
100%
100%
100%
354
95%
100%
92%
77
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
85%
100%
100%
586
93%
93%
80%
74
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.
Subobjective 2.2.1 Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis
WQ-
SP10.N11
WQ-SP11
WQ-
SP12.N11
WQ-
SP13.N11
Number of waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining water
quality standards where standards are now fully attained.
(cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2002 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Remove the specific causes of waterbody impairment identified
by states in 2002. (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
mprove water quality conditions in impaired watersheds
nationwide using the watershed approach, (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Ensure that the condition of the Nation's streams does not
degrade (i.e., there is no statistically significant increase in the
percent of streams rated "poor" and no statistically significant
decrease in the streams rated "good").
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2006 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
OMB PA
BUD
SG, KPI
ARRA, SP
3,927
3,927
3,608
3,527
3,324
3,119
2,909
39,503
3,690
3,608
3,527
3,324
3,119
2,909
39,503
160
156
144
140
117
101
6,710
184
176
176
171
127
126
1,805
610
600
583
575
557
544
8,998
536
526
516
514
504
495
5,274
756
736
736
665
646
630
4,550
223
220
206
200
190
182
1,407
456
441
434
383
353
295
2,036
376
371
371
314
270
270
1,274
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 3,360. This measure differs from previous Measure L, since WQ-SP10.N11 uses an updated 2002 base
results equal 1,980 waters - not included above.
BUD
12,134
12,134
11,473
11,134
10,161
9,527
8,446
69,677
11,798
11,473
11,134
10,161
9,527
8,446
69,677
480
465
434
420
369
320
8,826
593
577
569
554
456
453
2,567
EPA will review the FY14 budget target when preparing the FY15 OMB Submiss
BUD
SP
408
408
370
332
312
271
168
4,767
400
370
332
312
271
168
4,767
10
9
8
8
6
5
246
26
25
24
24
23
22
300
2,050
2,010
1,903
1,835
1,814
1,703
13,958
1,230
1,210
1,160
1,160
1,110
1,018
9,374
3,335
3,205
3,170
3,205
2,973
2,796
10,155
630
625
604
615
595
412
3,005
1,417
1357
1,327
623
550
340
4,391
798
793
793
607
541
529
3,502
130
124
109
109
105
72
1,041
259
258
252
253
250
194
6,408
ne. Note: 2000-2002
715
703
653
619
600
419
2,742
550
528
521
523
519
456
11,157
on.
22
21
20
20
18
16
300
68
62
56
56
48
40
2,000
40
35
30
30
23
20
378
62
57
49
45
38
17
213
13
12
11
8
7
5
169
49
43
39
37
31
20
684
33
31
26
30
28
15
27
77
75
69
54
49
8
450
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 330. EPA will review the FY14 budget target when preparing the FY15 OMB Submission.
OMB PA
SP
LT
Deferred for
FY14
Deferred for
FY 2013
CY 2013
Maintain or
improve
stream
conditions
28% good;
25% fair; 42%
poor
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is maintain or improve stream conditions, n FY15, EPA will be reporting on the Lakes Survey.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 6 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-
SPUa.Nll
WQ-
SP14b.Nll
WQ-
24.N11
WQ-Ola
WQ-26
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
Improve water quality in Indian country at baseline monitoring
stations in tribal waters (i.e., show improvement in one or more
of seven key parameters: dissolved oxygen, pH, water
temperature, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, pathogen
indicators, and turbidity), (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Identify monitoring stations on tribal lands that are showing no
degradation in water quality (meaning the waters are meeting
uses), (cumulative)
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided
access to basic sanitation in coordination with other federal
agencies (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of numeric water quality standards for total nitrogen and
for total phosphorus adopted by states and territories and
approved by EPA, or promulgated by EPA, for all waters within the
state or territory for each of the following waterbody types:
lakes/reservoirs, rivers/streams, and estuaries (cumulative, out of
a universe of 280).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
SP
OMB PA
BUD
LT
30
20
15
13
1,729
185
21
20
15
13
1,729
185
1
1
1
1
160
14
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
14
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1
1
1
1
37
2
3
3
3
2
729
44
1
1
1
1
68
1
n/a
1
n/a
n/a
150
4
2
2
2
2
100
10
10
8
5
4
203
43
3
3
2
2
268
67
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. FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strateg c Plan is 50 of the 185 monitoring locations to show improvement.
SP
1
SP
BUD
LT
Indicator
7
1,729
261
72,700
67,600
63.087
62,300
56.875
43,600
360,000
7
1,729
261
0
160
14
0
14
n/a
0
n/a
76
0
37
2
0
729
44
0
68
1
0
150
4
2
100
10
0
203
43
5
268
67
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 67,900. Corresponds with SDW-18: Number of American Indian and Alaska Native homes provided access to safe drinking
water in coordination with other federa agencies.
SG
46
42
42
41
45
31
280
42
42
42
41
45
31
280
1
1
1
1
1
3
34
7
7
7
7
7
5
20
5
5
5
4
5
0
34
4
4
4
4
6
0
44
3
3
3
3
4
1
24
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
n/a
0
24
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
0
0
16
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
n/a
0
24
22
22
22
22
22
22
38
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
22
Some of the 2012 results may not fully qualify and are under review. Needed adjustments are being made in 2013.
SG
27.67
22.66
0
56
24.45
22.66
0
56
4.83
4.83
0
6
1.00
1.00
0
4
4.67
4.5
0
6
2.99
2.00
0
8
3.33
3.00
0
6
1.33
1.33
0
5
0.97
0.67
0
4
0.33
0.33
0
6
4.33
4.33
0
7
0.67
0.67
0
4
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 7 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-02
WQ-03a
WQ-03b
WQ-04a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
National Program Manager Comments
Number of tribes that have water quality standards approved by
EPA. (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2013 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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
nformation from EPA or other resources not considered in the
previous standards.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent of tribes that within the preceding
three year period, submitted new or revised water quality criteria
acceptable to EPA that reflect new scientific information from EPA
or other resources not considered in the previous standards.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2013 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percentage of submissions of new or revised water quality
standards from states and territories that are approved by EPA.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments
New measure starting in FY13.
42
40
39
39
38
37
26
60
40
40
39
39
38
37
26
60
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
4
2
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
11
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
3
21
11
11
10
10
10
10
8
14
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).
OMB PA
BUD
SG
37
66.1%
37
66.1%
36
64%
39
38
39
38
37
56
33
59%
35
63%
39
38
39
38
37
56
2
1
2
2
2
2
4
6
4
1
3
3
3
3
1
4
5
6
6
6
5
3
4
6
5
6
5
5
5
8
7
8
3
4
4
4
6
6
4
6
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
5
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
6
2
3
3
3
4
3
4
7
1
3
3
3
2
1
3
4
FY05 baseline are end of year results from the WATA database.
13
34.2%
13 (34%)
14 (38%)
14 (38%)
13
16
12 (40%)
38
8
21%
13
14
14
13
16
12
38
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
n/a
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
1
5
n/a
n/a
1
1
1
3
5
10
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
0
2
3
2
3
3
3
4
6
0
8
n/a
3
3
3
2
2
3
9
The universe for FY11 and FY12 percentages for WQ-3b is the number of author zed tribes that have at least initial EPA approved water quality standards as of September 2010.
OMB PA
BUD
88%
88%
87.0%
88.9%
85%
91%
90.9%
78%
72.1%
88.9%
85%
91%
90%
75%
75%
100%
75%
100%
98%
ooq/
oo/o
n/a
75%
75%
100%
100%
88%
n/a
97%
75%
100%
100%
87%
87.0%
87.5%
87%
75%
96.7%
85%
70%
96%
85%
100%
99%
75%
75.0%
96.3%
75%
76%
100%
75%
50%
50%
50%
63.1%
47.2%
79%
79%
100%
79%
91.5%
79.6%
75%
75.0%
86.4%
75%
100%
100%
50%
66%
80%
66%
100%
77.8%
Based on submissions received in the 12 month period ending April 30 of the fiscal year. Partial approva s receive fractional credit. Universe is not applicable because it changes
annually based on number of water quality standards submissions.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 8 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-06a
WQ-06b
WQ-08a
WQ-08b
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
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)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of tribes that are providing water quality data in a format
accessible for storage in EPA's data system, (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of TMDLs that are established or
approved by EPA [Total TMDLs] on a schedule consistent with
national policy.
Note: ATMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order
to attain water quality standards. The terms 'approved' and
'established' refer to the completion and approval of theTMDL
itself.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of approved TMDLs, that are
established by states and approved by EPA [State TMDLs] on a
schedule consistent with national policy.
Note: ATMDL is a technical plan for reducing pollutants in order
to attain water quality standards. The terms 'approved' and
'established' refer to the completion and approval of theTMDL
itself.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
226
222
214
213
196
161
0
261
226
221
214
213
196
161
0
261
6
6
6
6
6
6
0
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
5
34
33
32
32
32
29
0
34
30
30
30
30
20
14
0
45
6
6
6
5
4
3
0
7
19
19
19
19
19
19
0
23
90
86
80
80
75
50
0
101
38
38
38
38
37
37
0
38
A cumulative measure that counts tribes that have developed, submitted to the region, and begun implementing water monitoring strategies that are cons stent with the EPA 106
Tribal Guidance.
197
189
184
178
171
3
261
197
189
184
178
171
107
3
261
A cumulative measure that counts tribes that are prov
OMB PA
BUD
KPI
67,494
(2,201
annual)
1,541
12,708
80%
2,922 (91%)
2,215 (69%)
2,846
4,951 (147%)
1,337
14,744
93%
2,922
2,215
2,846
4,951
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2
2
2
2
1
2
0
5
27
25
23
23
22
21
0
34
28
28
28
28
28
10
2
45
4
4
6
4
3
2
0
7
21
21
21
21
21
21
1
23
80
75
70
70
66
30
0
101
30
29
29
25
25
16
0
38
ding surface water data electronically in a format that is compatible with the STORET/WQX system.
95
140
264
208
253
439
30
2
100
100
134
112
212
244
694
547
730
2,823
108
13,318
209
208
284
305
275
325
349
325
401
437
110
135
231
206
214
230
120
120
145
101
204
124
150
150
166
150
155
184
50
70
426
130
131
82
282
240
338
240
340
215
Annual pace is the number of TMDLs needed to be consistent with national policy, i.e. generally within 8-13 years of listing of the water as impaired. EPA will work with its
partners this summer to develop and finalize the FY 2014 commitments.
OMB PA
BUD
SG
58,822
(2,195
annual)
1,537
12,694
80%
1,267
14,714
93%
2,702
86
140
264
30
2
100
212
244
694
108
13,293
177
275
325
349
110
135
192
120
120
145
150
150
166
50
70
299
212
235
316
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 9 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-09a
WQ-09b
WQ-09C
WQ-10
WQ-11
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments
Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of nitrogen from
nonpoint sources to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects
only).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of phosphorus from
nonpoint sources to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects
only).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 COMMITMENT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Estimated annual reduction in million tons of sediment from
nonpoint sources to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects
only).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of waterbodies identified by states (in 1998/2000 or
subsequent years) as being primarily nonpoint source (NPS)-
impaired that are partially or fully restored, (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of follow-up actions that are
completed by assessed NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System) programs, (cumulative)
2,123 (67%)
2,482
2,262 (69%)
2,123
2,482
2,262
208
253
439
100
134
112
530
454
224
193
255
249
325
401
437
181
195
222
101
165
150
155
184
100 1 235
131 I 339
215
Annual pace is the number of TMDLs needed to be consistent with national policy, i.e. generally within 8-13 years of listing of the water as impaired. EPA will work with its
partners this summer to develop and f nalize the FY 2014 commitments.
OMB PA
BUD
9.1
9.1
9,100,000
10,487,833
8,500,000
12,822,466
9,749,485
3,700,000
FY05 baseline for a 6 month period on
OMB PA
BUD
4.5
4.5
4,500,000
4,425,994
4,500,000
4,802,860
4,500,000
2,575,004
558,000
/. End of year results are received mid-February of the following year.
FY05 basel ne for a 6 month period only. End of year results are received mid-February of the following year.
OMB PA
BUD
1.2
1.2
1,100,000
919,518
700,000
2,006,674
2,054,869
1,680,000
FY05 basel ne for a 6 month period only. End of year results are received mid-February of the following year.
OMB PA
BUD
SG
LT
500
468
433
394
358
215
15
499
468
433
394
358
215
15
32
29
27
27
24
19
1
Regions report results. The universe is the estimated waterbodies
Note that th s universe shifts each time a new 303(d) 1 st is develop
(epa.gov/owow/nps/Success319/) are counted.
1
Indicator
20
19
17
17
15
12
0
64
60
54
54
49
31
2
80
76
71
61
57
52
5
42
37
32
32
27
22
3
43
41
39
27
26
17
0
51
47
43
28
21
20
4
32
28
24
24
20
16
0
20
18
16
15
14
9
0
115
113
110
109
105
17
0
mpaired primarily by nonpoint sources from the 1998 (or 2000 if states did not have a 1998 list) 303(d) lists.
ed, so this f gure is only an estimate. Only waters on the Success Story website
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 10 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-12a
WQ-12b
WQ-13a
WQ-13b
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of non-tribal facilities covered by NPDES permits that are
considered current.
[Measure will still set targets and commitments and report results
n both % and #.]
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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 #.]
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of MS-4s covered under either an
individual or general permit.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of facilities covered under either an individual or general
industrial storm water permit.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
344 (70.6%)
80%
85%
18%
100%
344 (93%)
293
253
54
368
40
29
27
6
36
25
21
21
5
27
27
27
23
4
32
32
29
27
9
41
55
51
44
16
66
17
17
17
2
23
37
33
23
6
47
57
40
28
3
39
20
19
17
1
21
34
27
26
2
36
Regional annual commitments and completed NPDES Action Items are confirmed by the HQ Action Items database. Assessed programs include 45 authorized states, 5
unauthorized states (MA, NH, NM, AK, ID), 1 authorized territory (VI), 3 author zed territor es (DC, PR, Pac fie Island Territories), and 10 Regions (total of 64 programs) assessed
through the Permitting for Environmental Results (PER) program and subsequent Permit Quality Reviews. Universe of 372 includes all follow-up Actions for which a schedule was
established. The universe increases as additional NPDES Action Items are identified through regional and HQ program review.
KPI
90%
88%
106,872
90.4%
88%
100,147
89%
95.4%
108,755
87.8%
(96,851)
120,708
83%
103,234
88%
106,046
90.4%
88%
100,147
89%
95.4%
108,755
87.8%
(96,851)
120,708
78%
1,366
80%
1,401
79%
80%
1,494
81%
86%
1,595
64%
1,751
85%
4,020
87%
4,114
86%
87%
2,868
87.3%
91%
3,007
94%
4,729
90%
18,710
89%
18,502
94%
89%
16,128
92%
87%
15,743
86%
20,789
85%
17,199
85%
17,173
93%
85%
15,938
94%
91%
16,990
87%
20,234
85%
16,820
88%
17,486
88%
88%
16,047
86%
88%
16,067
87%
19,788
90%
24,218
94%
25,294
98%
94%
24,434
98%
98%
25,572
93%
26,909
80%
9,017
90%
10,144
86%
90%
8,871
82.4%
90%
15,742
82%
11,271
78%
4,068
78%
4,068
73%
82%
4,512
79%
82%
4,534
87%
5,215
78%
1,796
80%
1,842
80%
80%
2,191
81%
84%
2,289
91%
2,303
78%
6,021
78%
6,021
79%
80%
7,665
76%
75%
7,216
77%
7,719
Targets, commitments, and results will be reported in both percent and number. This measure includes facilities covered by all permits, including state and EPA issued permits.
Due to the shifting universe of permitees, its is important to focus on the national percent. FY05 baseline not from ACS.
90%
88%
381
86.1%
85%
351
87%
84%
363
80% (261)
433
90%
371
85%
366
86.1%
85%
367
87%
84%
363
80% (261)
433
100%
2
0%
0
0%
0%
0
0%
100%
2
0
2
100%
2
100%
2
100%
100%
2
100%
100%
2
2
2
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
100%
11
100%
11
100%
100%
11
100%
100%
11
16
11
95%
44
95%
42
94%
95%
43
96%
93%
41
37
46
80%
10
85%
11
90%
80%
10
93%
100%
13
8
13
100%
18
100%
18
56%
100%
18
73.3%
94%
15
1
18
90%
194
90%
194
94%
90%
194
94%
97%
202
140
216
88%
45
85%
44
94%
85%
43
90%
86%
43
41
51
60%
44
60%
44
58%
60%
44
55%
52%
34
16
74
Targets, commitments, and results will be reported in both percent and number. This measure includes facilities covered by all permits, including state and EPA issued permits.
Due to the shifting universe of permitees. its is important to focus on the national percent.
1
Indicator
6,888
6,952
6,919
6,632
520
520
510
1,279
1,262
1,262
1,119
991
1,026
693
744
675
1,687
1,813
1,813
659
674
626
209
208
258
251
251
263
244
262
260
227
227
226
The Universe is n/a The end of year results are used to develop the universe of facilities covered under a MS-4.
1
Indicator
87,060
84,718
3,599
3,553
4,614
4,651
6,566
6,621
16,111
19,091
17,763
20,508
21,186
13,922
6,821
6,257
4,313
4,313
1,991
1,886
4,096
3,916
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 11 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-13C
WQ-13d
WQ-14a
WQ-14b
WQ-15a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of sites covered under either an individual or general
construction storm water site permit.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of facilities covered under either an individual or general
CAFO permit.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of Significant Industrial Users
(SIDs) that are discharging to POTWs with Pretreatment Programs
that have control mechanisms in place that implement applicable
pretreatment standards and requirements.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of Categorical Industrial Users
(ClUs) that are discharging to POTWs without Pretreatment
Programs that have control mechanisms in place that implement
applicable pretreatment standards and requirements.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC)
at any time during the fiscal year.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
88,788
86,826
3,489
4,412
6,337
18,577
20,508
18,065
7,576
4,866
971
3,987
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 storm water permit.
1
Indicator
166,031
168,744
186,874
242,801
3,405
9,127
11,177
10,454
9,955
5,669
29,648
27,974
28,983
45,453
50,835
54,607
8,251
8,172
7,477
26,021
11,643
24,463
The Universe is n/a The end of year results are used to develop the universe of facilities covered under either either an inidividua
1
Indicator
7,581
7,994
7,882
8,623
18,972
7
7
6
0
33
563
566
566
624
632
457
444
333
175
770
1,042
863
967
2,131
3,621
1,824
2,234
2,145
1,488
2,523
741
794
781
1,391
4,190
10,133
13,931
13,254
16,000
16,019
10,013
12,269
14,512
23,339
4,397
6,576
7,892
or general construction storm water permit.
1,521
1,521
1,510
1,239
3,777
673
680
658
448
841
190
198
205
296
1,670
563
687
711
831
915
FY05 CAFO data is not from ACS. Note: It is likely the regions overestimated the number of CAFOs covered by a general permit in 2005.
SG
20,750
98%
20,711
98.0%
20,733
98.4%
20,814
97.9%
20,977
99.3%
21,487
22,013
21,121
20,750
98.2%
20,629
98.2%
20,733
98.2%
20,814
97.9%
20,977
99.3%
21,487
96%
21,121
1,341
98.0%
1,296
1,341
1,305
1,301
1,316
1,363
1,378
1,555
98.0%
1,555
1,571
1,595
1,617
1,656
2,110
1,587
1,583
93.7%
1,583
1,613
1,696
1,662
1,710
1,723
1,689
3,475
98.2%
3,470
3,461
3,460
3,467
3,539
3,418
3,539
4,391
100.0%
4,367
4,366
4,400
4,524
4,903
5,265
4,367
1,976
98.3%
1,976
1,976
1,976
1,972
1,997
2,132
2,010
982
97.3%
980
1,000
980
983
995
829
1,009
647
98.3%
647
647
647
647
647
592
658
4,129.72
98.0%
4,088
4,088
4,088
4,137
4,137
4,019
4,214
670
100.0%
667
670
667
667
587
562
670
All universe numbers are approximate as they shift from year to year.
1
Indicator
1,667 (94.1%)
81%
77%
94%
100%
1,599 (99.6%)
1,306
1,278
1,547
1,801
44
45
45
44
45
94
64
71
65
72
76
67
68
66
75
272
267
283
313
321
824
463
521
679
825
120
124
124
109
124
83
191
84
193
243
36
36
36
31
42
6
6
6
6
6
44
43
40
41
48
All universe numbers are approximate as they shift from year to year.
OMB PA
BUD, SG
<22.5%
<22.5%
1 <22.5%
<22.5%
23.2%
n/a
n/a
28.5%
n/a
21%
n/a
33.1%
n/a
31%
n/a
18.6%
n/a
6%
n/a
17.7%
n/a
19%
n/a
11.7%
n/a
16%
n/a
23.8%
n/a
29%
n/a
49.1%
n/a
55.3%
n/a
12.27%
n/a
14%
n/a
15.9%
n/a
21%
n/a
9.1%
n/a
8%
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 12 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-16
WQ-17
WQ-19a
WQ-19b
WQ-22a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
FY 2006 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number, and national percent, of all major publicly-owned
treatment works (POTWs) that comply with their permitted
wastewater discharge standards, (i.e. POTWs that are not in
significant non-compliance)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Fund utilization rate [cumulative loan agreement dollars to the
cumulative funds available for projects] for the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund (CWSRF).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE (in billions)
National Program Manager Comments
Number of high priority state NPDES permits that are issued in
the fiscal year.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of high priority state and EPA (including tribal) NPDES
permits that are issued in the fiscal year.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2013 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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.
n/a
19.7%
6,643
n/a
19.7%
6,643
n/a
25.0%
426
n/a
28.7%
582
n/a
15.0%
757
n/a
20.7%
1,345
11%
17.7%
1,167
n/a
23.7%
1,087
n/a
17.7%
396
n/a
8.0%
260
n/a
13.7%
347
n/a
15.3%
276
HQ reports results by Region. No regional commitments are set.
OMB PA
BUD
86%
86%
86.0%
88.3%
86%
86.7%
86.9%
3,670
100%
3,645
3,645
3,612
3,665
4,336
4,334
3,670
4,238
FY 2012 EOY result is based on a universe of 4,089 permits.
OMB PA
BUD
ARRA
94.5%
94.5%
94.5%
98%
94.5%
98%
100%
94.7%
$84.5
96%
94.8%
97%
94.5%
98%
100%
94.7%
$84.5
92%
94%
94%
94%
104%
108%
110%
$8.1
90%
90%
93%
90%
95%
95%
94%
$16.6
94.5%
93%
96%
92%
95%
96%
89%
$7.3
90%
90%
94%
95%
99%
100%
95%
$9.9
100%
100%
99%
100%
97%
102%
98%
$18.1
120%
95%
94%
96%
95%
94%
91%
$8.0
85%
96%
93%
92%
98%
101%
88%
$4.4
94%
94%
88%
95%
96%
98%
91%
$2.7
95%
96%
111%
95%
107%
111%
93%
$6.8
100%
100%
104%
98%
103%
100%
98%
$2.5
Universe represents the cumulaitve funds available for projects for the CWSRF, n billions of dollars (i.e., the denominator of the measure). Targets include all funds (ARRA and
Base).
OMB PA
BUD, SG
80%
80%
595
850 (130%)
652
943
1,008 (142%)
753
563
595
850
653
943
1,008
753
8
11
15
14
27
16
18
24
24
33
29
41
40
30
81
80
141
137
157
142
101
25
73
126
80
158
181
90
127
130
196
124
161
197
159
22
14
91
56
82
91
28
182
145
138
95
160
194
182
Starting in FY13, results can no longer exceed 100% issuance due to a refinement of the measure definition, and the target was revised accord
percentage results changed from the number of permits committed to issuance n the current fiscal year to the total number of permits select
BUD
80%
80%
652
925 (128%)
719
1,005
1,097 (144%)
826
610
652
925
720
1,005
1,097
826
16
23
34
31
50
53
35
33
33
52
39
54
49
41
81
80
142
138
158
145
101
25
73
126
80
158
181
90
127
130
196
124
161
197
159
24
15
97
59
86
95
30
190
151
138
108
161
194
190
Starting in FY13, results can no longer exceed 100% issuance due to a refinement of the measure definition, and the target was revised accord
percentage results changed from the number of permits committed to issuance n the current fiscal year to the tota number of permits select
1
Indicator
41
41
52
54
66
62
51
11
8
12
20
26
43
10
42
69
46
44
65
42
84
ngly. The universe used to calculate
ed as priority.
42
42
55
57
68
62
52
15
12
15
23
31
62
14
57
93
70
61
78
59
114
ngly. The universe used to calculate
ed as priority.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 13 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WQ-23
WQ-25a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of serviceable rural Alaska homes with access to drinking
water supply and wastewater disposal.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of urban water projects initiated addressing water
quality issues in the community.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
7
4
0
10
7
4
0
10
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
3
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
New measure for FY11.
OMB PA
BUD
93.5%
93.5%
93%
n/a
92.5%
n/a
91%
The universe is not applicable since units are percent of serviceable homes.
BUD
10
10
10
46
3
46
TBD
New measure for FY12.
Subobjective 2.2.2 Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters
co-
222. Nil
CO-
SP20.N11
CO-02
Prevent water pollution and protect coastal and ocean systems to
improve national and regional coastal aquatic system health on
the 'good/fair/poor' scale of the National Coastal Condition
Report.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2004 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that will
have achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (as
reflected in each site's management plan and measured through
on-site monitoring programs).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
2012 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Total coastal and non-coastal statutory square miles protected
from vessel sewage by "no discharge zone(s)." (cumulative)
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
OMB PA
SP
BUD
LT
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.3
5.0
Rating consists of a 5-po nt system where 1 is poor and 5 is good. FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan s equal or less than 2.8.
BUD
SP
95%
95%
97%
97%
96%
93%
94% (60)
67
97%
97%
97%
96%
93%
60
67
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
5
5
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
3
4
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
2
2
90%
90%
90%
90%
74%
17
17
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
86%
86%
86%
79%
79%
15
13
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
11
12
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
7
14
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 95%.
1
Indicator
58,929
54,494
53,635
52,607
163,129
3,779
3,019
3,132
2,511
6,453
6,015
2,340.33
1,580.33
1,271
5,995
65.17
65.17
65.17
65
7,882
3,084.77
3,084.77
2,872
2,775
24,128
45,701
45,701
45,701
45,701
55,419
2
2
2
2
9,905
0
0
0
0
568
254
254
254
254
1,749
28
28
28
28
9,883
0
0
0
0
41,145
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 14 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
CO-04
CO-06
CO-
432.N11
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
National Program Manager Comments
Dollar value of "primary" leveraged resources (cash or in-kind)
obtained by the NEP Directors and/or staff in millions of dollars
rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of active dredged material ocean dumping sites that are
monitored in the reporting year.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
2012 UNIVERSE
Working with partners, protect or restore additional acres of
habitat within the study areas for the 28 estuaries that are part of
the National Estuary Program (NEP).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
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 regu ations (in statutory square miles). Note the change in units of
measure from FY08 to FY10 (FY08: linear miles, FY09: acres, FY10: statutory square miles).
1
Indicator
$323
$662
$274.3
$158.8
$201
$530
$71.3
$12.3
$10
$29
$12.6
$46.9
$7
$11
$9.3
$7.7
$27
$31
$43.1
$19.1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
$8
$10
$5.8
$4.5
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
$17
$7
$25.1
$51
$53
$44
$107.1
$17.3
(Dollars in millions). Note that "primary" leveraged dollars are those the National Estuary Program (NEP) played the central role in obtaining. An example of primary leveraged
dollars would be those obtained from a successful grant proposal written by the NEP.
1
OMB PA
BUD
SP
100,000
Indicator
35
33
33
n/a
67
100,000
100,000
114,579
100,000
62,213
89,985
449,241
38,652
48,655
114,575
45,742
62,213
89,985
449,241
2
1
3
n/a
5
2,894
2,500
3,589
2,543
6,259.6
3,955.37
14,562
2
2
1
n/a
4
1,103
1,255
3,017
1,258
1,350.9
1,435.8
15,009
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 600,000. The FY14 nationa
budget target included in the FY14 CJ.
1
2
2
n/a
2
3,650
2,400
4,726
2,650
5,403
3,052.08
33,793
7
12
6
n/a
17
25,000
30,000
52,801
30,000
29,723.8
67,142.6
232,605
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
7
2
5
n/a
13
3,000
3,000
8,776
3,000
5,269.3
740
54,378
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2
2
6
n/a
12
500
1,000
30,438
1,000
9,059.9
8,670
82,363
14
12
10
n/a
14
2,505
8,500
11,228
5,291
5,146.7
4,989.34
16,531
commitment is higher than the regional aggregates because the commitment aligns w th the
Subobjective 2.2.3 Increase Wetlands
WT-SP22
WT-01
In partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, states and
tribes, achieve 'no net loss' of wetlands each year under the Clean
Water Act Section 404 regulatory program.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments
Number of acres restored and improved, under the 5-Star, NEP,
319, and great waterbody programs (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2006 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
BUD
No net loss
No net loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
No Net Loss
Data source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ORM2 Regulatory Program Database. Please note that there s a data lag with this measure. Reports for the fisca year reflect the
previous calendar year.
BUD
200,000
200,000
190,000
180,000
170,000
154,000
130,000
58,777
These acres may include those supported by Wetland 5 Star Restoration Grants, National Estuary Program, Section 319 grants, Brownfields grants, or EPA's Great Waterbodies
Program. Commitment represents a cumulative tota . Unexpected accomplishments in FY06, particularly n the National Estuary Program, contributed sign ficantly to the total
number of wetland acres restored and enhanced.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 15 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
WT-02a
WT-03
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
Number of states/tribes that have substantially built or increased
capacity in wetland regulation, monitoring and assessment, water
quality standards, and/or restoration and protection. (Annual)
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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 FY 08 documents
requirements for greater environmental protection* than
originally proposed.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments
1
Indicator
44
54
47
20
589
6
6
5
6
9
0
0
0
0
7
5
5
5
3
5
1
3
1
7
6
4
4
4
0
41
3
3
3
0
68
2
4
3
1
9
9
16
13
3
27
8
2
5
0
146
6
11
8
0
271
ntended to allow us to track work of all states/tribes (those just starting to build wetland programs and those that are improving well developed programs . Tracks the number of
states/tribes that have substantially bu It or increased capacity in wetland regulation, monitoring and assessment, water quality standards, and/or restoration and protection.
Substantially built or increased capacity is defined as completing two or more of the actions found in the tables found at: epa.gov/owow/estp/. This measure is evaluated
annually and is an indicator of where states and tribes are focusing their wetland development effort, the baseline resets to zero annually and is not a cumulative measure. This
measure has revised measure language beginning FY10, which means FY10 results cannot be compared to previous years.
1
Indicator
85%
88%
87%
100%
0%
0%
100%
85%
93%
93%
89%
90%
96%
75%
78%
82%
40%
91%
100%
100%
33%
57%
Tracking capabilities began in 1/2010. Tracking totals will appear in FY11. Reported on by Regions and HQ.
*"Requirements for greater environmental protection" are counted under this measure when EPA can document that its recommendations for improvement provided n one or
more of the following issue areas were ncorporated into the final permit decis on:
1. Demonstration of adequate impact avoidance, inc uding:
a) Determination of water dependency; b) Characterization of bas c project purpose; c) Determination of range of practicable alternatives; d) Evaluation of direct, secondary and
cumulative mpacts for practicable alternatives; e) Identification of Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative; f) Compliance with WQS, MPRSA, ESA and/or toxic
effluent standards; g) Evaluation of potential for significant degradation.
2. Demonstration of adequate impact minimization
3. Determination of adequate compensation
Note: The documented permit decision can be in the form of an issued, withdrawn, or denied permit. The universe is the number of individual permits where EPA has the
opportunity to comment (approximately 5,000/year). Regional priorities dictate the specific permits for which EPA submits comments. This number is typically less than 5,000.
Subobjective 2.2.4 The Great Lakes
GL-
433. Nil
GL-SP29
Improve the overall ecosystem health of the Great Lakes by
preventing water pollution and protecting aquatic ecosystems.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Cumulative percentage decline for the long term trend in average
concentrations of PCBs in Great Lakes fish.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
OMB PA
SP
BUD
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.9
21.9
21.9
22.7
21.5
40
23.4
23.4
23.9
21.9
21.9
22.7
21.5
40
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is at least 24.7. This measure provides a general indication of progress of numerous state and federal programs, with a specific
focus on coastal wetlands, phosphorus concentrations, AOC sediment contam nation, benthic health, fish tissue contamination, beach closures, drinking water quality, and air
toxics deposition.
OMB PA
BUD
46%
46%
43.0%
42.8%
40%
46%
43.0%
42.8%
40%
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 16 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
GL-SP31
GL-
SP32.N11
GL-05
GL-06
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
National Program Manager Comments
Number of Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes where all
management actions necessary for delisting have been
implemented (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Cubic yards (in millions) of contaminated sediment remediated in
the Great Lakes (cumulative from 1997).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of Beneficial Use Impairments removed within Areas of
Concern, (cumulative)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of nonnative species newly detected in the Great Lakes
ecosystem.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
44%
43%
44%
43%
Indicates that PCBs in top predator fish (generally lake trout, but walleye in Lake Erie) at monitored sites s expected to continue an average annual decrease of 5%. 2000 is the
baseline year. A 2-year ag between measurement and reporting means that the FY13 commitment perta ns to measurements made in 2011. n FY12, 2010 data is compared to
2000; in FY13, 2012 data is compared to 2000; and so forth.
OMB PA
BUD
5
5
4
2
3
2
1
1
31
5
4
2
3
2
1
1
31
This measure identifies the cumulative target for taking all necessary management actions to delist the original 31 US or binational Areas of Concern. Through FY11, such
management actions have been taken at 2 AOCs (in New York and Pennsylvania .
OMB PA
BUD
SP
11
11
10.3
9.7
9.1
8.4
7.3
3.7
46
11
10.3
9.7
9.1
8.4
7.3
3.7
46
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 10.2 million. Universe identifies quantity of contaminated sediment estimated to require remediation as of 1997. This total
has been revised from a previous estimate of 75 million cubic yards based on state-submitted information and subsequent decisions, information verificat on, and actual
remediations. Informat on lags behind (i.e. the 2013 commitment is for calendar year 2012 sediment remediation).
OMB PA
BUD
46
46
41
33
33
26
12
11
261
46
41
33
33
26
12
11
261
New measure added for FY09 from 2007 OMB PA review.
BUD
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1
1.0
181
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1
1.0
181
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 17 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
GL-07
GL-09
GL-10
GL-11
GL-12
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
National Program Manager Comments
Number of multi-agency rapid response plans established, mock
exercises to practice responses carried out under those plans,
and/or actual response actions (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a
target level (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of populations of native aquatic non-threatened and
endangered species self-sustaining in the wild (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of acres of wetlands and wetland-associated uplands
protected, restored and enhanced (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats protected,
restored and enhanced (cumulative).
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
During the ten-year per od prior to the Great Lakes Restoration In t ative (2000-2009), 13 new invasive species were believed to be discovered within the Great Lakes. This is a
baseline rate of invasion of 1.3 species per year. NOAA scientists have since rec assified the detection dates of three species based on a reassessment and categorization of
available data. This alters the baseline to 1.0 species per year (10 species from 2000-2009). The FY12 and FY13 commitments of 0.8 are based on this new baseline. These
commitments also assume the same rate of detection one species over the five years of the Action Plan as the original commitments.
BUD
29
29
26
23
12
8
0
n/a
29
26
23
12
8
0
n/a
New measure starting in FY11, added from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan.
BUD
36,000
36,000
34,000
31,474
15,500
13,045
0
36,000
34,000
31,474
15,500
13,045
0
The unprecedented leve of funding for invasive species work capitalized on a backlog of projects and appears to have achieved economies of scale due to significantly larger
projects. Approximately 4,800 acres of this effort contribute to efforts to protect, restore, and enhance costal habitat (GL-12) and are also inc uded in the results for that measure.
Reporting for this measure relies heav ly upon receiving and validating informat on from funding recipients (grantees, states, federal agencies, sub-grantees .
BUD
35%
52
35%
52
34%
50
33%
33%
51
31%
27%
147
35%
52
34%
50
33%
33%
51
31%
27%
147
New measure starting in FY11, added from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan. Numerator: # of populations of native aquatic non-T&E and non-candidate species
that are self-sustaining in the wild. Denominator: total # of native aquatic non-T&E and non-candidate populations. Baseline: 39/147 populations.
BUD
70,000
70,000
68,000
65,639
11,000
9,624
0
550,000
70,000
68,000
65,639
11,000
9,624
0
550,000
New measure starting in FY11, added from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan.
BUD
38,000
38,000
33,000
28,034
15,000
12,103
0
38,000
33,000
28,034
15,000
12,103
0
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 18 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
GL-13
GL-16
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of species delisted due to recovery.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Acres in Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices
mplemented to reduce erosion, nutrients, and/or pesticide
oading.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.5 The Chesapeake Bay
CB-
SP33.N11
CB-SP34
CB-SP35
Percent of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation goal of 185,000 acres
achieved, based on annual monitoring from prior year.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of Dissolved Oxygen goal of 100% standards attainment
achieved, based on annual monitoring from the previous calendar
year and the preceding 2 years.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
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.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
1,000,000
1,000,000
New measure starting in FY11, added from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan. FY12 target was adjusted in FY13 President's Budget.
BUD
2
1
2
1
1
1
0
28
1
2
1
1
1
0
28
New measure starting in FY11, added from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan. Target is cumulative starting in 2011.
BUD
30%
30%
20%
70%
8%
62%
165,000
30%
20%
70%
8%
62%
165,000
New measure starting in FY11. The commitments measure annual percentage increases from the FY05 baseline. The acres tracked in this measure are not cumulative but are for
new conservation practices implemented in a given fiscal year. The percentage ncrease will vary considerably by year due to funding, the conservation universe, and the difficulty
of conservation practices.
OMB PA
SP
LT
Long Term
Long Term
34%
43%
46% (85,9 14)
39% (72,945)
185,000
LT
LT
34%
43%
46%
39%
185,000
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 50% (92,500) goal achievement.
OMB PA
LT
Long Term
Long Term
34%
38.5%
12%
30% (22.73)
100% (74.8)
LT
LT
34%
38.5%
12%
30%
100%
Historic data for measure changed due to new assessment method adopted during development of the Bay TMDL. Results from FY11 EOY reflect new method, past results
reported here reflect the old method. The revised historic results are FY05: 42%; FY08: 40.5%; FY09: 42.1%; FY10: 39.4%. Long term budget target is 40% by FY 2015. Efforts by Bay
jurisdictions and EPA to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus pollution are essential for achieving the target and will be a challenge to mplement. ncreasing water temperatures (due
to climate change) will add additional challenges to our ability to achieve the FY15 target.
OMB PA
BUD
30%
30%
22.5%
21%
15%
8%
30%
22.5%
21%
15%
8%
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 19 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
CB-SP36
CB-SP37
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of goal achieved for implementing phosphorus pollution
reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured
through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Percent of goal achieved for implementing sediment pollution
reduction actions to achieve final TMDL allocations, as measured
through the phase 5.3 watershed model.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.6 The Gulf of Mexico
GM-SP38
GM-SP39
Restore water and habitat quality to meet water quality standards
in impaired segments in 13 priority areas, (cumulative starting in
FY07)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2002 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
Restore, enhance, or protect a cumulative number of acres of
mportant coastal and marine habitats, (cumulative starting in FY
07)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
51%
0%
100%
51%
0%
100%
FY 2014 target is based on a straightline trajectory to achieve 60% by FY 2018.
OMB PA
BUD
30%
FY 2014 target is based
OMB PA
BUD
30%
30%
22.5%
19%
15%
1%
67%
0%
100%
on a straight! in
30%
22.5%
30%
15%
11%
69%
0%
100%
30%
22.5%
19%
15%
1%
67%
0%
100%
= trajectory to achieve 60% by FY 2018.
30%
22.5%
30%
15%
11%
69%
0%
100%
FY 2014 target is based on a straightline trajectory to achieve 60% by FY 2018.
BUD
BUD
360
30,600
360
360
316
290
286
170
0
812
30,800
30,600
30,796
30,600
30,052
29,552
16,000
3,769,370
Coastal habitat includes marshes, wetlands, tidal flats, oyster beds, seagrasses, mangroves, dunes and maritime forest ridge areas.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 20 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
GM-
SP40.N11
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
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.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.7 Long Island Sound
LI-SP41
Ll-
SP42.N11
LI-SP43
Percent of goal achieved in reducing trade-equalized (TE) point
source nitrogen discharges to Long Island Sound from the 1999
baseline of 59, 146 TE Ibs/day.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 1999 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Reduce the size (square miles) of observed hypoxia (Dissolved
Oxygen <3mg/l) in Long Island Sound.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Restore, protect or enhance acres of coastal habitat from the
2010 baseline of 2,975 acres.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
SP
Deferred for
FY 2014
Deferred
Deferred
Deferred
17,520 km2
20,000 km2
14,128 km2
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is less than 5,000 km2, as measured by the 5-year running average size of the zone.
BUD
78%
85%
76%
83%
74%
69%
70% (33,703
TE Ibs/day)
59,146TE
Ibs/day
85%
76%
83%
74%
69%
70%
59,146
Measure tracked in Trade Equalized (TE) Ibs/day. TE Ibs/day are pounds of nitrogen adjusted by application of an equ valency factor assigned to each point source based on its
proximity to the receiving water body (LIS). The TMDL established a Waste Load Allocation of 22,774 TE Ibs/day from point sources, to be ach eved over a 15 year period beginning
in 2000. The annual commitments are calculated by dividing the d fference between the 1999 baseline and 2014 target by 15 (the TMDL period), or 2,425 TE Ibs/day per year.
SP
LT
Deferred
288.5 sq
miles
Deferred
130 sq miles;
54 days
101 sq miles;
40 days
187 sq miles;
58.6 days
1,400 sq
miles (total);
122 days
(actually
monitored)
LT
Deferred
288.5
Deferred
130; 54
101; 40
187; 58.6
1,400; 122
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is to reduce the maximum area of hypox a by 15%. New measure starting in FY08. Due to inter-annual variability, annual
reduction targets are not calculated for this measure. Note on Un verse: The 13 year pre-TMDL year average measured maximum area of hypoxia in the Sound is 208 square
miles.
BUD
410 acres
410 acres
420 acres
537 acres
218 acres
890%
410 acres
420 acres
537 acres
218 acres
890%
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 21 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
LI-SP44
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2008 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Reopen miles of river and stream corridors to diadromous fish
passage from the 2010 baseline of 177 river miles by removal of
dams and barriers or by installation of bypass structures.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2008 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.8 The Puget Sound Basin
PS-
SP49.N11
PS-SP51
mprove 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)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Restore acres of tidally- and seasonally-influenced estuarine
wetlands, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2007 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.9 U.S. -Mexico Border Environmental Health
MB-SP23
Loading of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removed
cumulative million pounds/year) from the U.S. -Mexico Border
area since 2003.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2003 BASELINE
740%
(1,361)
1,199
restored &
protected
740%
(1,361)
1,199
The long-term percentage goal of this measure was significantly exceeded in FY10. Measure revised in FY12 to measure actual acres to be restored instead of percent of goal
achieved. The EPA will establish annual targets with partners to measure annual progress.
BUD
1.5 miles
1.5 miles
75 miles
72.3 miles
28 miles
72%
72%
124
1.5 miles
75 miles
72.3 miles
28 miles
72%
72%
124
The long-term percentage goal of this measure was significantly exceeded in FY11. Measure revised in FY12 to measure actual m
achieved. The EPA will establish annual targets with partners to measure annua progress.
BUD
SP
7,758
7,758
7,758
2,489
3,878
1,525
4,453
322
30,000
es to be reopened instead of percent of goal
7,758
7,758
2,489
3,878
1,525
4,453
322
30,000
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 4,300 acres. New measures starting in FY08. Baseline is the end-of-year data for FY07.
BUD
33,818
33,818
31,818
23,818
19,063
14,629
10,062.7
4,152
45,000
33,818
31,818
23,818
19,063
14,629
10,062.7
4,152
45,000
New measures starting in FY08. Baseline is the end-of-year data for FY07.
OMB PA
BUD
135.8
135.8
127
119
115
108.55
18.7
0
135.8
127
119
115
108.55
0
107.6
99.6
97.1
93.1
87
0
28.2
26.9
21.9
21.9
21.55
0
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 22 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
MB-
SP24.N11
MB-
SP25.N11
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
National Program Manager Comments
Number of additional homes provided safe drinking water in the
U.S. -Mexico border area that lacked access to safe drinking water
n 2003.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2003 BASELINE
FY 2003 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Number of additional homes provided adequate wastewater
sanitation in the U.S. -Mexico border area that lacked access to
wastewater sanitation in 2003.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2003 BASELINE
FY 2003 UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.10 The Pacific Island Territories
PI-SP26
Percent of population in the U.S. Pacific Island Territories served
by community water systems that has access to continuous
drinking water meeting all applicable health-based drinking water
standards, measured on a four quarter rolling average basis.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.11 The South Florida Ecosystem
SFL-SP45
Achieve 'no net loss' of stony coral cover (mean percent stony
coral cover) in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
(FKNMS) and in the coastal waters of Dade, Broward, and Palm
Beach Counties, Florida, working with all stakeholders (federal,
state, regional, tribal, and local).
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
Measure first reported in FY10. FYlO's target and result represent annual progress only. Starting in FY11, the program will report cumulative progress from 2003 to the current
measure-year. 2003 Baseline: zero pounds/year of BOD removed from U.S.-Mex co Border area waters as a result of new infrastructure projects. In FY 2010, the EOY result was
65.15 million pounds per year. Additional removal for FY 2010 was 18.7 million pounds per year.
OMB PA
BUD
SP
1,700
1,700
3,000
5,185
1,000
2,604
21,650
0
98,515
1,700
3,000
5,185
1,000
2,604
21,650
0
1,700
3,000
5,185
1,000
2,604
19,751
0
n/a
n/a
0
n/a
0
1,899
0
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 75% of homes. Measure is regionally reported starting in FY09. FY03 Baseline: zero additional homes provided safe drinking
water in the U.S. -Mexico Border area. FY03 Universe: 98,515 known homes in the U.S.-Mex co Border area lacking access to safe drinking water.
OMB PA
BUD
SP
39,500
39,500
24,000
31,092
10,500
259,371
75,175
0
690,723
39,500
24,000
31,092
10,500
259,371
75,175
0
FY 2015 target in FY 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan is 75% of homes. Measure is
sanitation the U.S. -Mexico Border area. FY03 Universe: 690,723 known homes
BUD
84%
80%
82%
87%
80%
87%
82%
95% AS, 10%
CNMI, 80%
GU
35,000
7,000
30,355
9,000
239,871
71,926
0
4,500
17,000
737
1,500
19,500
3,249
0
regionally reported starting in FY09. FY03 Baseline: zero additional homes provided wastewater
n the U.S. -Mexico Border area lacking access to wastewater sanitation.
80%
82%
87%
80%
87%
82%
95%; 10%:
80%
New measure starting in FY08. AS: American Samoa, CNMI: Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, GU: Guam.
1
Indicator
No Net Loss
Loss
No Net Loss
No Net
Loss
Loss
No Net
Loss
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 23 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
SFL-SP46
SFL-SP47a
SFL-SP47b
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
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 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
At least seventy five percent of the monitored stations in the near
shore and coastal waters of the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary will maintain Chlorophyll a (CHLA) levels at less than or
equal to 0.35 ug 1-1 and light clarity (Kd)) levels at less than or
equal to 0.20 m-1.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 1995-2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
At least seventy five percent of the monitored stations in the near
shore and coastal waters of the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary will maintain dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) levels
at less than or equal to 0.75 uM and total phosphorus (TP) levels
at less than or equal to .25 uM .
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
6.8% in
FKNMS; 5.9%
in SE Florida
6.8%
FKNMS;
5.9% SE FL
New measures starting in FY08 and changed to Indicator in FY11. Strategic Plan baseline of 6.7% was rev sed to 6.8%. The Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project (CREMP)
for the Florida Keys Nat onal Marine Sanctuary was modified in 2006 by dropp ng one hardbottom mon toring site because of the very small percentage of stony coral cover
present (less than .2%), resulting in an ncrease of .1 percent in the mean percent stony cora cover for the entire Sanctuary. Stat stical analyses of the CREMP indicated that
sampling a reduced number of stations at sites with low stony cora cover would still produce statistically valid results.
1
New measures starting
BUD
75
Indicator
Not
Maintained
Maintained
Maintained
El = 8.3;
SCI=0.48
Not
Maintained
Maintained
Maintained
El = 8.3;
SCI=0.48
n FY08 and changed to Indicator in FY11. El = Elemental Indicator; SCI = Species Composition ndex.
75%
75%
70.9%; 72.5%
75%
75%;
85.4%
Maintained
<0.35ug/L
(75.7%);
SO^Onf1
(74.6%)
154
75%
75%
70.9%;
72.5%
75%
75%;
85.4%
Maintained
75.7%;
74.6%
154
New measure starting in FY11. Results reported as CHLA %; Kd %.
BUD
75
75%
75%
81%; 89.5%
75%
84.3%
73.6%
Maintained
75%
75%
81%;
89.5%
75%
84.3%
73.6%
Maintained
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 24 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
SFL-SP48
SFL-1
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 1995-2005 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
mprove the water quality of the Everglades ecosystem as
measured by total phosphorus, including meeting the 10 parts per
billion (ppb) total phosphorus criterion throughout the Everglades
Protection Area marsh and the effluent limits for discharges from
stormwater treatment areas.
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2005 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Increase percentage of sewage treatment facilities and onsite
sewage treatment and disposal systems receiving advanced
wastewater treatment or best available technology as recorded
by EDU. in Florida Keys two percent (1500 EDUs) annually.
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2009 BASELINE
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Subobjective 2.2.12 The Columbia River Basin
CR-SP53
CR-SP54
Clean up acres of known contaminated sediments, (cumulative
starting in FY 06)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2010 END OF YEAR RESULT
UNIVERSE
National Program Manager Comments
Demonstrate a reduction in mean concentration of certain
contaminants of concern found in water and fish tissue.
(cumulative starting in FY 06)
FY 2013 COMMITMENT
FY 2012 END OF YEAR RESULT
<0.75 uM
(76.3%);
<0.25uM
(80.9%)
154
76.3%;
80.9%
154
New measure starting in FY11. Results reported as DIN %; TP %.
BUD
Maintain P
Baseline
Maintain P
Baseline
Maintain P
baseline
Not
maintained
Maintain
phosphorus
baseline
Measure not
Met
Not
maintained
See
comments
Maintain P
Baseline
Maintain P
baseline
Not
maintained
Maintain P
baseline
Measure
not Met
Not
maintained
New measure starting in FY08. FY05 Baseline: Average annual geometric mean phosphorus concentrations were 5 ppb in Everglades National Park, 10 ppb in Water Conservation
Area 3A, 13 ppb in Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, and 18 ppb in Water Conservation Area 2A; annual average flow -weighted total phosphorus discharges from
Stormwater Treatment Areas ranged from 13 ppb for area 3/4 and 98 ppb for area 1W.
1
Indicator
47,505
42,000
32,000
75,000
47,505
42,000
32,000
75,000
New measure starting in FY11.
86
80
79
63
63
20
400
86
80
79
63
63
20
400
New measures starting in FY08.
1
Indicator
10%
n/a
10%
n/a
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 25 of 26
-------
Appendix A - FY 2014 National Water Program Measures
FY2014
ACS
Codes
Italicized AC
Measure), a
FY 2 014 Measure Text
Measure
Category
FY2014
Budget
Target
FY2014
Planning
Target
Regional
Aggregates
Region
1
Region
2
Region
3
Region
4
Region
5
Region
6
Region
7
Region
8
Region
9
Region
10
5 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
id 1 (Indicator Measure). FY 2014 Budget Target is from 8-year performance measure table in the FY 2014 G. SP (Strategic Plan) targets are from the FY2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan. The SP is currently being updated to cover FY 2014-2018.
FY 2012 COMMITMENT
FY 2011 END OF YEAR RESULT
FY 2006 BASELINE
National Program Manager Comments
Deferred
92%
5 sites
Deferred
92%
5 sites
Measure was updated in 2012 for 2014. FY12 commitment deferred, however, FY12 EOY is reported: 95% decrease in average and maximum detection levels between 2006
(baseline year) and 2011 for CHLORPYRIFOS and a 100% reduction in azinphos-methyl in the West Prong Little Walla Walla River, South of Stateline Road, Oregon. No data
available for other sites.
Sites: Oregon: West Prong, Little Walla Walla River, South of Stateline Road for Chlorpyrifos and Azinphos methyl; Oregon: North Fork Deep Creek (Clackamas Sub-basin) for
Chlorpyrifos; Washington: Walla Walla River, RM 14.3 for DDT and Washington: Yakima River, RM 18-30 for DDT. For detailed information on the baseline, see
http://www.epa.gov/regionlO/pdf/co umbia/basel ine_document_2009-2014.pdf
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 26 of 26
-------
Appendix B - Key Contacts in the National Water Program
Subobjective
National Water
Program Guidance
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
The Great Lakes
The Chesapeake Bay
The Gulf of Mexico
Long Island Sound
The Puget Sound
U.S. -Mexico Border
Environmental Health
The Pacific Island
Territories
The South Florida
Ecosystem
The Columbia River
Basin
Contact
Vinh Nguyen (IO)
Ian Achimore (IO)
Travis Cummings
(OGWDW)
Eric Bissonette
(OGWDW)
Amber Erickson (OST)
Amber Erickson (OST)
KatherineTelleen (OWM)
Kristie Moore (OWOW)
KatherineTelleen (OWM)
Gregory Stapleton (OST)
Kristie Moore (OWOW)
Kristie Moore (OWOW)
Michael Russ (GLNPO)
Nita Sylvester (CBPO)
Lael Butler (GMPO)
Joseph Salata (USD)
MarkTedesco(LISO)
Chris Castner (RIO)
Angela Bonifaci (RIO)
Stephanie Von Feck
(OWM)
John McCarroll (PIO)
Michael Mann (PIO)
Steve Blackburn (R4)
Jennifer Derby (R4)
MaryLou Soscia (RIO)
Phone
(202) 564-4631
(202) 564-0370
(202) 564-9592
(202) 564-2147
(202) 566-2984
(202) 566-2984
(202) 564-7933
(202) 566-1616
(202) 564-7933
(202) 566-1028
(202) 566-1616
(202) 566-1616
(312)886-4013
(410) 267-5711
(228) 688-1576
(203) 977-1541
(203) 977-1541
(206)553-6517
(206) 553-0332
(202) 564-0609
(415) 972-3774
(415) 972-3505
(404) 562-9397
(404) 562-9401
(503) 326-5873
Email
nguyen.vinh@epa.gov
achimore.ian@epa.gov
cummings.travis@epa.gov
bissonette.eric@epa.gov
erickson.amber@epa.gov
erickson.amber@epa.gov
telleen.katherine@epa.gov
moore.kristie@epa.gov
telleen.katherine@epa.gov
stapleton.gregory@epa.gov
moore.kristie@epa.gov
moore.kristie@epa.gov
russ.michael@epa.gov
sylvester.nita@epa.gov
butler.lael@epa.gov
salata.joseph@epa.gov
tedesco.mark@epa.gov
castner.chris@epa.gov
bonifaci.angela@epa.gov
vonfeck.stephanie@epa.gov
mccarroll.john@epa.gov
mann.michael@epa.gov
blackburn.steven@epa.gov
derby.jennifer@epa.gov
soscia.marylou@epa.gov
Key:
IO - Immediate Office of the Office of Water
OGWDW - Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
OST - Office of Science and Technology
OWM - Office of Wastewater Management
OWOW - Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds
R - EPA Regional Office
GLNPO - Great Lakes National Program Office
CBPO - Chesapeake Bay Program Office
GMPO - Gulf of Mexico Program Office
LISO - Long Island Sound Office
PIO - Pacific Island Office
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
-------
Appendix C- Explanation of Changes from FY 2013 to FY 2014
Change from FY 2013 National Water Program Guidance
Reason for Change
Affected
Sections
Priorities
National Water Program Areas of Focus for FY 2014:
A. Protecting Populations at Risk
B. Improving the Integrity of the Nation's Drinking
Water and Clean Water Quality
C. Providing Safe and Sustainable Water Resources and
Infrastructure
D. Controlling Nutrient Pollution
E. Assuring High Quality and Accessible Water
Information
As part of the new LEAN format, significant changes
were made to the structure and content of the Guidance
to streamline the discussion to focus on FY 2014
activities.
Water priorities are discussed under Section II., National
Water Program Areas of Focus Guidance. The National
Water Program revised priorities to focus on FY 2014
activities and applicable performance measures, with
cross reference to subobjective strategies in Section III.
Section II,
from page 5
Strategies
Cross-Cutting Themes:
1. National Water Program and Tribes
2. Protecting Urban Waters
3. Climate Change
4. Implementing Innovative Technology in Water
5. Grants management
Cross-cutting themes are grouped and moved to the
front of the subobjective sections. These themes focus
on FY 2014 activities and applicable performance
information. Where applicable, cross references to
priorities and subobjective strategies are provided via
hyperlinks.
Section III,
from page
18
Implementing Innovative Technology in Water
A new cross-cutting section is added to emphasize the
National Water Program's work in integrating
technology innovation.
Section
III.A.4, from
page 22
Subobjective strategies
Due to the new LEAN format, the structure and content
of the subobjective narrative have been streamlined and
updated to focus on FY 2014 activities and performance
measures. Much of background information has been
replaced by links to existing documents and websites.
Section III,
section B, C,
and D, from
page 26
Annual
Commitment
Measures
Measure modified: SDW-Ola. Percent of community water
systems (CWSs) that have undergone a sanitary survey
within the past three years (five years for outstanding
performers or those ground water systems approved by the
primacy agency to provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
The measure is updated to reflect the Ground Water
Rule requirements. Changes to methodology for
computation of results include: 1) territories will now be
included in the calculation, 2) baseline updated from FY
2008 to FY 2012. The FY 2012 baseline is 79% (FY 2012).
The universe is 49,183.
Appendix A,
page 2
Measure modified: SDW-Olb. Number of tribal community
water systems (CWSs) that have undergone a sanitary survey
within the past three years (five years for outstanding
The measure is updated to reflect the Ground Water
Rule requirements. Changes to methodology for
computation of results include: baseline updated from
Appendix A,
page 2
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 1 of3
-------
Appendix C- Explanation of Changes from FY 2013 to FY 2014
Change from FY 2013 National Water Program Guidance
Annual
Commitment
Measures
performers or those ground water systems approved to
provide 4-log treatment of viruses).
Proposed modification: WQ-SP10. Nil Number of
waterbodies identified in 2002 as not attaining water quality
standards where standards are now fully attained.
(cumulative)
WQ-SP11 Remove the specific causes of waterbody
impairment identified by states in 2002. (cumulative)
WQ-SP12.N11 Improve water quality conditions in impaired
watersheds nationwide using the watershed approach.
(cumulative)
Measure deleted: WQ-25b. Number of urban water projects
completed addressing water quality issues in the
community.
Measure deleted: WT-SP21.Nll.Working with partners,
achieve a net increase of wetlands nationwide, with
additional focus on coastal wetlands, and biological and
functional measures and assessment of wetland condition.
Measure deleted: GL-08. Percent of days of the beach
season that the Great Lakes beaches monitored by state
beach safety programs are open and safe for swimming.
Measure deleted: GL-15. Five-year average annual loadings
of soluble reactive phosphorus (metric tons per year) from
tributaries draining targeted watersheds.
Measure deleted: GM-435. Improve the overall health of
coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico on the "good/fair/poor"
scale of the National Coastal Condition Report.
Measure modified: CR-SP54. Demonstrate a reduction in
mean concentration of certain contaminants of concern
Reason for Change
FY 2005 to FY 2012. The FY 2012 baseline is 529. The
universe is 706.
Based on feedback on revising the baseline, as well as
how EPA tracks environmental progress, EPA has begun
evaluating the baseline and measure of water quality
improvement issues. After some initial discussions with
regions and states, EPA will continue to track progress
towards restoring impaired waters (WQ-SP10.N11, WQ-
SP11, and WQ-SP12.N11) using the 2002 baseline in the
short-term. However, states will have an opportunity to
report additional accomplishments beyond the 2002
baseline separately. Although this is a short-term fix,
EPA is committed to working with our partners to
develop solutions that can be implemented in the long-
term.
The measure is being deleted as no projects are
expected to be completed in FY 2014.
The measure is deleted because it will not have annual
targets or results. Achieving a net increase of wetlands
remains a long-term goal that is included in the Agency's
Strategic Plan.
The measure is deleted due to data uncertainties.
The measure is deleted as insufficient data exists for this
measure.
The measure is deleted because it will not have annual
targets or results in this Guidance. Data will be available
with the release of each NCCR.
The measure is being changed to an indicator due to the
complexity of setting reduction targets for five different
Affected
Sections
Appendix A,
page6
Appendix A
Appendix A
Appendix A
Appendix A
Appendix A
Appendix A,
page 25
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 2 of3
-------
Appendix C- Explanation of Changes from FY 2013 to FY 2014
Change from FY 2013 National Water Program Guidance
Contacts
found in water and fish tissue, (cumulative starting in FY 06)
Contacts by subobjective.
Reason for Change
sites with overlapping contaminants, compared to FY
2006 monitoring.
Adding a list of contacts by subobjective.
Affected
Sections
Appendix B
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 3 of 3
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State and Interstate Grant Recipients
This appendix, along with the specific text found in Section III.C.I.a, provide guidance for state
and interstate grant recipients when implementing water pollution control programs under
Section 106 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Together, Section III.C.I, and Appendix D make up
the CWA Section 106 grant guidance.
Associated Program Support: Since FY 1999, Congress has included language in the State and
Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) account for "multi-media and single media pollution prevention,
control and abatement, and related activities", authorizing EPA to use a portion of the funds
available for those programs to fund activities that benefit all or a portion of the state and tribal
grant recipients - the associated program support costs authority. See Public Law 105-276.
EPA is currently developing guidance for use of associated program support costs authority by
the Section 106 Program. Generally, the associated program support costs authority is used to
support activities that promote the common goals of the requesting state(s) and/or promote
administrative efficiency and cost savings to the recipients. For EPA to use STAG 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.
FY 2014 Nutrient Initiative: The FY 2014 President's Budget continues to support an additional
$15 million in Section 106 funds for a Nutrient Initiative to support state, interstate agencies,
and tribal activities to address water quality impairment through the reduction of nutrient loads.
This initiative will work in conjunction with activities being carried out by states and tribes using
Section 319 and USDA funding. The March 16, 2011, Nancy K. Stoner memorandum, Working in
Partnership with States to Address Phosphorus and Nitrogen Pollution through Use of a
Framework for State Nutrient Reductions, will be used as the framework for awarding Section
106 funds to implement nutrient reduction activities. A separate guidance will be provided for
the nutrient initiative funds.
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-8b
WQ-10
WQ-12a
WQ-13a, b, c, d
WQ-14a
WQ-15a
WQ-19a
SS-1
Measures specific to tribal programs are found in Section III.A.I. 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.I.,
Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis.
Other programs in the NWPG that can utilize CWA Section 106 Funds: State and interstate
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:
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance
Page 1 of3
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State and Interstate Grant Recipients
Source Water (Surface Water and Ground Water): EPA regions and states are reminded that
CWA Section 106 grant funds are an essential funding source for the states' source water
protection activities. The Agency recommends that states 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. States 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 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. States should consider placing a high
priority on (a) waterbodies where state 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,
states should consider the 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.
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' 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 have utilized CWA Section 106 funds for program
implementation, including wetlands monitoring and protection projects.
Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat: See the grant program guidance at:
http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan.
Water Safe for Swimming: See the grant program guidance at:
http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan.
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.
• Office of Compliance and Enforcement Assurance National Program Manage Guidance. In
October, 2009, EPA issued the Clean Water Act Action Plan ("the Action Plan"). The Action
Plan identifies steps EPA will take to improve enforcement efforts aimed at addressing
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance Page 2 of 3
-------
Appendix D - Additional Guidance for CWA Section 106
State and Interstate Grant Recipients
water quality impairment. The Office of Water continues to work with the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), EPA regions, and states to implement the
Action Plan. For more information on specific enforcement actions for 2014, please see the
2014 OECA National Program guidance at http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2014.
Office of Water: FY 2014 National Water Program Guidance Page 3 of 3
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
&EPA
EPA 850-K-13-003
www.epa.gov
------- |