**Building Drinking Water Capacity in Native Alaskan Villages**

**2006-2007**

**Environmental Public Health Leadership Institute Fellow:**

**Cindy Christian; BA, MPA**

*Environmental Program Manager II,* State of Alaska, Drinking Water
Program

*Department of Environmental Conservation*

*Division of Environmental Health*

*610 University Avenue*

*Fairbanks, AK 99709*

*(907) 451-2138*

[*Cindy_Christian@dec.state.ak.us*](mailto:Cindy_Christian@dec.state.ak.us)

**Mentor:**

**Robbin Rose; MS, REHS**

*Supervisor, Food Protection Program*

*Environmental Health Services Division*

*Washoe County District Health Department*

*Reno, Nevada*

**Acknowledgements:**

I would like to thank the following people for all of their support and
assistance during my fellowship in the Environmental Public Health
Leadership Institute:

Kristin Ryan

Director

Division of Environmental Health

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

Kathaleen Kastens

Compliance and Technical Services Manager, ADEC Drinking Water Program

Vanessa Wike

Statewide Engineering Manager, ADEC Drinking Water Program

Jeanine Oakland

Statewide Compliance, ADEC Drinking Water Program

Heather Newman, Southcentral Program Coordinator, ADEC Drinking Water
Program

Marci Irwin, Northern Program Coordinator, ADEC Drinking Water Program

Susan Bulkow, Kenai-Soldotna Program Coordinator, ADEC Drinking Water
Program

Lynn Lowman, Mat-Su/Southeast Program Coordinator, ADEC Drinking Water
Program

And finally, thanks to Robbin Rose. She has been an outstanding mentor
and has been amazing in her dedication to helping guide our team through
this process. Her enthusiasm for the Institute was infectious and has
greatly enriched this experience for me.

![](media/image1.jpeg){width="1.3756944444444446in"
height="0.6368055555555555in"}

**EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:**

Historically, there have been high rates of diseases associated with
unsafe drinking water and lack of sanitation in Alaskan Native Villages.
In an attempt to address these public health problems, state and federal
agencies were funded to design and build public water systems (PWS) in
rural Alaska. There are now PWS in most villages that treat and
distribute drinking water for public use. The water systems in each
village are subject to the regulations enacted by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and
amendments. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
Drinking Water (DW) Program is the primacy agency responsible for
enforcing the SDWA regulations within the State of Alaska. Under the
SDWA 1996 Amendments, requirements for capacity development were enacted
for all PWS's. The capacity development regulations require that each
system demonstrate the technical, managerial and financial capacity to
deliver safe drinking water to their residents. Demonstrating capacity
has been a challenge for villages and public health protection goals
continue to be unmet. Many villages cannot meet the requirements due to
lack of economic resources, geographic and climatic extremes, lack of
understanding of the regulations, lack of trained water treatment plant
operators and other social concerns. Currently, there are multiple state
and federal agencies involved in helping the villages deliver safe
drinking water. This project addresses new ways to coordinate various
state and federal agency efforts to develop capacity in the villages and
ways to improve communication between the DW Program and villages. A
process has been developed to assess the capacity development status in
villages and to develop ways that state and federal agencies can
coordinate their activities to assist villages in capacity development
efforts for the protection of public health.

**INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:**

Traditionally, Alaska Native people were nomadic or semi-nomadic,
traveling between fishing and hunting areas throughout the year. When
the State of Alaska began to be settled, Native people moved or were
moved into permanent village settlements. There are now approximately
220 recognized Native Villages in the State of Alaska. ^1^ Each village
had a "traditional source" for drinking water and "honey buckets" for
human waste that were dumped into ponds or other areas near the village.
Historically, villages have had very high levels of disease, such as
Hepatitis A, diarrhea, boils, skin rashes, and pneumonia, associated
with unsafe drinking water and lack of sanitation. ^2^ In an attempt to
address these severe public health problems, state and federal agencies
were created and funded to address the lack of sanitation in these
villages. The main focus of these agencies was to design and build water
treatment plants and sewage treatment lagoons in the villages. Over the
past 30 years, millions of state and federal dollars have been allocated
to design and build public water systems in the villages.

A significant number of these PWS have chronic difficulties in meeting
the State of Alaska Drinking Water Regulations, including the capacity
development requirements. The capacity development regulations require
each PWS to demonstrate the technical, managerial and financial capacity
to produce and distribute safe drinking water to their consumers. ^3^ As
a result of non-compliance with the Drinking Water Regulations, many
village PWS are on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Significant
Non-Compliers (SNC) List. The EPA SNC List is a tracking tool used by
the DW Program and EPA to track systems that are in chronic
non-compliance with the Drinking Water Regulations. Being on the EPA SNC
List can lead to major enforcement actions, which may include fines and
penalties. It may also result in the loss of capital funding for water
treatment plant upgrades or new water systems.

There have been many efforts to address these chronic capacity problems;
however, to date they have been met with little success. There are
multiple state and federal agencies that provide assistance to village
PWS. Agency services are not well coordinated and the DW Program, as the
regulatory primacy agency, is often viewed as overly intrusive and
antagonistic towards the needs of the villages. Many villages find the
Drinking Water Regulations to be very complex and they are unsure of how
they can comply with the regulations, why compliance is important, how
they can utilize the various agencies to come into compliance, and why
they are punished for non-compliance.

It is the responsibility of the DW Program to ensure that public health
protection in villages is being accomplished. However, the current
approach needs to be changed. The DW Program must identify effective
ways to address the complex compliance issues so that federal funding is
not withdrawn, the village PWS will be maintained and people will have
access to safe drinking water.

There are several different phases that must be completed for any
drinking water or sanitation project in a village. During the design
phase, the villagers are nominally involved in the master planning
process. The village is assigned to an agency, either the ADEC Village
Safe Water (VSW) or the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC)
to begin the design phase of the project. The agency holds meetings with
the village to determine the PWS needs within the village. There are
several types of PWS configurations that may be considered for use in
the villages. A system may be a watering point, which consists of a
water treatment plant, storage facility, and a single watering point
where villagers can collect water in containers. The PWS may be a piped
distribution system, which consists of a water treatment plant, storage
facility and distribution lines that bring treated water directly to
homes. A PWS may be a truck haul system, which consists of a water
treatment plant and trucks used to deliver treated water to residential
holding tanks. The type of PWS selected depends on the geographic
conditions, especially the presence of permafrost, the population served
and the economic resources of the village. Once the master planning
process is completed, funds are allocated from various agencies and
construction of the PWS begins.

The DW Program enters the process at this point. Construction approval
is granted by the DW Program through an engineering plan review process
to make sure that the proposed PWS meets all of the requirements of the
Drinking Water Regulations. Once regulatory compliance is met,
construction approval is granted. Then the PWS is constructed and goes
through an approval process to operate which includes an engineering
plan review process to ensure that the water treatment plant, storage
facilities and transmission and distribution system are built according
to specifications. If the PWS meets all the required criteria, approval
to operate is granted and it becomes subject to all of the state and
federal drinking water regulations.

The DW Program is a primacy agency responsible for implementing the SDWA
within the State of Alaska. EPA rules are adopted and promulgated by the
state and all compliance and enforcement activities are carried out by
the DW Program. There are currently eighteen chemical and
microbiological rules that PWS's must comply with, including the Total
Coliform Rule, Inorganic and Organic Chemicals, Surface Water Treatment
Rules, Consumer Confidence Rule, Lead and Copper Rule and Disinfection
By-Products Rule. These rules are very complex and require that the
communities employ certified operators to run the water system and
ensure compliance with the Drinking Water Regulations. The DW Program
requires testing and reporting to monitor the PWS compliance with the
regulations. When reports are not submitted or testing is not done,
violations are created. State violations must be transmitted to the EPA.
When violations occur, the DW Program responds with either compliance
assistance or enforcement depending on the severity of the violations.

Many villages cannot meet the requirements of all the regulations
because of the following reasons:

> **[Lack of trained operators]{.underline}** - Many Native speaking
> operators cannot pass the certification tests because they are only
> given in English. Many times operators are not paid by the village for
> their work. Adequate support for the operator may not be available
> from the community.
>
> **[Lack of economic resources]{.underline}** - Most villages have a
> subsistence lifestyle where there is little or no cash economy.
> Villagers may have trouble paying for utility services. Utilities have
> problems paying and training operators, and there is little money to
> pay for water testing, treatment chemicals and supplies.
>
> **[Geographic/climate extremes]{.underline}** -- Many PWS are
> geographically remote. Many places in Alaska have no road system and
> the only access to the villages is by airplane or helicopter. It is
> difficult to get replacement parts for the PWS. Fuel and electricity
> to run the water treatment plant are expensive. Water systems
> routinely freeze and distribution lines constantly break due to very
> cold temperatures. It is extremely difficult to get water samples to
> the lab on time, especially time dependent samples like total coliform
> bacteria.
>
> **[Lack of commitment in the village]{.underline}** -- Some villagers
> do not like the taste of chlorine or groundwater, which in Alaska has
> high levels of iron. The villagers prefer to use their traditional
> water sources for drinking water and the treated water for washing
> clothes.
>
> **[Social concerns/issues]{.underline}** -- Alaska Native Villages
> have the highest rates of suicide, fetal alcohol syndrome, post-natal
> death and accidental death in the United States. Due to limited
> economic resources, drinking water may not be a priority for these
> villages.
>
> All of these factors lead to the inability of many villages to meet
> the capacity development requirements set forth in the Drinking Water
> Regulations.
>
> ***Problem Statement:***
>
> There are approximately 220 Alaska Native Villages that have a PWS. A
> significant number of these PWS's are on the EPA's SNC List due to
> noncompliance with the Drinking Water Regulations. Most noncompliance
> issues are due to the village's lack of technical, managerial and
> financial capacity to properly run the water treatment plant. Why are
> the villages not able to achieve technical, managerial and financial
> capacity?
>
> ***Behavior Over Time Graph:***
>
> ![](media/image2.wmf){width="6.322222222222222in"
> height="4.334027777777778in"}

**Figure 2. Behavior over Time Graph**

**\*** PWS -- Public Water System

\* TMF -- Technical, Managerial and Financial Capacity

\* C and TA -- Compliance and Technical Assistance

***Causal Loop Diagrams and applicable archetypes:***

**Figure 2.** **Shifting the Burden**

***10 Essential Environmental Health Services***

![](media/image3.png){width="3.783333333333333in"
height="3.8465277777777778in"}

**Figure 3. Reprinted from CDC's "National Strategy to Revitalize
Environmental Public Health Services"**

The objectives and goals of this project correspond to many of the Ten
Essential Environmental Heath Services as outlined by Carl Osaki,
University of Washington, Department of Environmental and Occupational
Health and Northwest Center for Public Health Practice. ^4^ The
corresponding objectives and goals are as follows:

1.  **Monitor environmental and health status to identify community
    environmental health problems.**

> **•** The potential for waterborne disease outbreaks due to
> insufficient water treatment processes continues to be a problem for
> villages. Many village PWS's use surface water as a source. Due to
> insufficient technical, financial and managerial capacity, water may
> not be properly treated and distributed. The DW Program monitors
> regulated contaminants in drinking water by requiring periodic testing
> of the treated water. This project is designed to assist villages in
> developing capacity so that they are able to better monitor the safety
> of their drinking water supply.

2.  **Diagnose and investigate environmental health problems and health
    hazards in the community.**

> • A new diagnostic tool has been developed as part of this project to
> identify villages that have problems complying with the Drinking Water
> Regulations. These regulations are health-based standards and if a
> water system is not able to comply, they may not be delivering safe
> drinking water. The diagnostic tool is a holistic approach to solving
> capacity problems which may prevent community access to safe drinking
> water.

3.  **Inform, educate and empower people about environmental health
    issues.**

> **•** A major component of this project has was to establish monthly
> Technical Assistance Providers (TAP) meetings with various State and
> Federal agencies involved in providing technical and financial
> assistance to villages in rural Alaska. The main goal of these
> meetings is to coordinate assistance efforts in the villages and to
> provide information and education to individuals involved with the
> delivery of safe drinking water.

4.  **Mobilize community partnerships to identify and solve
    environmental health problems.**

> • The DW Program has developed partnerships with various TAP's and
> village leaders to identify ways in which assistance can be better
> delivered to the rural communities.

5.  **Develop policies and plans that support individual and community
    environmental health efforts.**

> • This project is designed to provide a more holistic approach to
> providing technical, managerial and financial assistance to villages,
> which will help them to deliver safe drinking water to their
> residents. The DW Program is implementing policies and procedures to
> better support community efforts in the delivery of safe drinking
> water.

6.  **Enforce laws and regulations that protect health and ensure
    safety.**

> **•** The Drinking Water Regulations are health-based standards
> designed to ensure the safety of treated drinking water. The DW
> Program is responsible for the implementation and enforcement of these
> regulations in the State of Alaska.
>
> **7. Link people to needed environmental health services and assure
> the provision of environmental health services when otherwise
> unavailable.**
>
> **•** One of the main goals of this project is to coordinate TAP
> efforts in the villages so services can be more efficiently delivered
> to the people in need. This includes making villages aware of the
> available services and linking them to those services.

10. **Conduct research for new insights and innovative solutions to
    environmental health problems and issues.**

> **•** One of the goals of this project is to continue to find and
> implement new ways to deliver services to villages and to apply
> systems thinking methods in the development of compliance and
> enforcement activities.

***National Goals Supported***

1\. This project supports one of the primary CDC Health Protection
Goals: "Healthy People in Healthy Places". By promoting greater access
to safe drinking water in Alaskan Native Villages, this project is in
line with the goal of promoting "Healthy Communities". The Healthy
Communities goal specifically states: "Increase the number of
communities that protect, and promote health and safety and prevent
illness and injury in all their members (e.g., safe food, safe water,
built in sidewalks). ^5^

This project also supports the Environmental Health objective as
outlined in *Healthy People 2010*. ^6^ *Healthy People 2010* provides
the major guidelines for states to develop public health strategies. The
State of Alaska Department of Health and Social Services developed
*Healthy Alaskans 2010: Targets and Strategies for Improved Health*
based on the objectives outlined in *Healthy People 2010.* Under the
Environmental Health focus area, the stated goal is "To ensure all
Alaskans have access to safe water and food and live in healthy
communities." ^7^ The percentage of rural Alaskan households with access
to running water and sewer systems increased from 56% in 1996 to 69% in
2000. This project directly supports this goal by promoting greater
access to safe drinking water in rural Alaskan communities.

2\. This project supports the following goals and objectives in the
CDC's *National Strategy to Revitalize Environmental Public Health
Services:* ^8^

**Goal I: Build Capacity -- Strengthen and support environmental public
health services at the state, tribal, territorial, and local levels.**

[Objective 1-C:]{.underline} Identify the range of activities,
interventions, and resources available for delivering environmental
public health programs in the United States, and maintain a continuous
assessment process.

**Goal IV: Communicate and Market -- Improve communication and
information sharing among environmental health agencies, communities,
strategic partners, and other stakeholders and better market
environmental public health services to policymakers and the public.**

[Objective IV-A:]{.underline} Identify and promote community-based
strategies to elevate the image, importance and need to improve
environmental public health services.

[Objective IV-B]{.underline}: Support educational approaches and models
of best practices to gain community support and participation in
addressing environmental public health service issues, concerns and best
models to organize, deliver and market them.

**Goal VI: Create Strategic Partnerships -- Foster interactions among
agencies, organizations, and interests that influence environmental
public health services.**

[Objective VI:]{.underline} Coordinate and promote activities that
identify critical stakeholders, and foster communication and interaction
among agencies, organizations, and interests that influence
environmental public health services.

***Project Logic Model:***

####### 

**PROJECT OBJECTIVES/DESCRIPTION/DELIVERABLES:**

***Program Goal:*** To help Alaskan Native Villages develop technical,
managerial and financial (TMF) capacity to provide safe drinking water.

***Health Problem*:** Historically, villages have had very high levels
of disease associated with unsafe drinking water and lack of sanitation.
These diseases have included Hepatitis A, diarrhea, boils, skin rashes,
and pneumonia.

***Outcome Objective:*** By 2009, 50% of the villages on the historic
EPA SNC List will develop sufficient technical, managerial and financial
capacity to be in significant compliance with the State of Alaska
Drinking Water Regulations, 18 AAC 80. Compliance with the Drinking
Water Regulations will ensure the safety of the drinking water delivered
to the villagers.

***Determinant:*** The PWS that are in compliance with the Drinking
Water Regulations, as measured by the number of village systems on the
historic EPA SNC List.

***Impact Objective:*** By 2009, the number of villages on the EPA SNC
List will be reduced by 50%.

***Contributing Factors:***

1.  Lack of technical, managerial and financial capacity in villages.

2.  Lack of coordination between government agencies (ANTHC, VSW, DW
    Program, Rural Capacity Assistance Program, Remote Maintenance
    Workers, Rural Utilities Business Advisors) delivering drinking
    water services in villages.

3.  Ineffective communications from the DW Program.

4.  Lack of village cultural knowledge among DW Program staff.

5.  Lack of flexibility within the Drinking Water Regulations.

6.  Reliance on punitive enforcements actions instead of mutually
    agreeable compliance schedules.

***Process Objectives:***

1.  By April 2006, the DW Program will establish monthly coordination
    meetings for the TAP.

2.  By September 2006, a process to address historic EPA SNC's will be
    developed by the DW Program and TAP.

3.  By September 2006, ten villages will be identified to receive
    compliance assistance by the DW Program and TAP designed to increase
    technical, managerial and financial capacity.

4.  By December 2006, all DW Program staff will receive cross cultural
    training.

5.  By December 2006, DW Program communication (letters) will be
    developed to better explain compliance problems and solutions for
    villages.

6.  By 2009, 50% of villages on the historic EPA SNC List will be in
    compliance with the Drinking Water Regulations.

**METHODOLOGY:**

***Events and Activities:***

1.  Establish monthly meetings with TAP's.

> **Event:** Meetings will be held with key TAP's on a monthly basis to
> coordinate activities.
>
> **Activities:**
>
> ● establish meeting format, times and coordination with other TAP's

2.  Develop a process to address historic EPA SNC's in conjunction with
    the TAP.

> **Event:** A compliance assistance process will be developed to
> address the capacity problems in selected villages.
>
> **Activities:**
>
> ● identify compliance assistance activities that would help to improve
> technical, managerial and financial capacity in villages
>
> ● develop a definition of "significant compliance"
>
> ● identify areas within the EPA and ADEC Drinking Water Regulations
> that allow for more flexibility for small PWS
>
> ● identify alternate compliance and enforcement activities that will
> address regulatory problems

3.  Identify ten villages that would benefit from the compliance
    assistance process.

> **Event:** Identify villages that would benefit from coordinated
> compliance assistance from TAP and the DW Program.
>
> **Activities:**
>
> ● review the last two historic EPA SNC Lists (October 2005 and April
> 2006) to determine consistent non-compliance with the Drinking Water
> Regulations.
>
> ● select 10 villages from this list to receive increased assistance
>
> ● develop a review process to determine which villages would be
> appropriate candidates for assistance (i.e. village is willing to put
> forth effort to develop capacity, village has a functioning government
> structure, and village has an operator willing to work with TAP and DW
> Program)

4.  DW Program staff to receive cross-cultural training.

> **Event:** All DW Program staff will attend scheduled cross-cultural
> training.
>
> **Activities:**
>
> ● coordinate training opportunities with other TAP (ANTHC, RUBA, VSW,
> RCAP)
>
> ● schedule training for DW Program staff
>
> ● staff completes scheduled training

5.  DW Program staff will develop a communication plan to enhance its
    efforts with the villages.

> **Event:** Develop more effective communication with villages.
>
> **Activities:**
>
> ● reformat compliance and enforcement letters to better explain
> compliance problems and solutions
>
> ● develop template letters for use in all field offices
>
> ● identify person or persons to review DW Program communications for
> cultural awareness and suitability
>
> ● develop "scripts" for telephone communications for staff to use when
> talking to villages

6.  Reduce historic EPA SNC List by 50% by 2009.

> **Event:** Establish baseline measurement of the historic EPA SNC
> List.
>
> **Activities:**
>
> ● review October 2005 and April 2006 historic EPA SNC Lists to
> determine overall number of villages on the list
>
> ● establish baseline list to be used for all future comparison
>
> **RESULTS:**
>
> Many of the events and activities identified above have been
> implemented by the ADEC DW Program.

1.  **Establish monthly meetings with TAP.** The DW Program held the
    first monthly meeting with the other TAP's on January 27, 2006.
    During the first meeting, the following goals were established and
    agreed upon: a. coordinate the major services of the TAP's so that
    communities have the best access to those services; b. assist
    villages to understand the public health importance of the Drinking
    Water Regulations; and c. encourage villages to become more involved
    in decisions that affect their ability to deliver safe drinking
    water to their residents. Monthly meetings have been held every
    month during 2006 and the first meeting of 2007 is scheduled for
    January 11. An interactive website has been developed to allow for
    greater coordination of visits to communities, and to serve as a
    site where villages can have access to information regarding the
    TAP.

2.  **Develop a process to address historic EPA SNC's in conjunction
    with the TAP.** A diagnostic process has been developed to identify
    those villages that would most benefit from the TAP services. The
    diagnostic process includes analyzing the following parameters: EPA
    SNC status; current compliance status; the government structure in
    the community; the financial status of the community; the status of
    funding from state and federal agencies; and the latest trip reports
    from TAP's. This process has been used to evaluate all of the
    village PWS currently on the historic EPA SNC List and to identify
    which systems would best benefit from this program.

3.  **Identify ten villages that would benefit from the compliance
    assistance process.** Using the diagnostic process, ten villages
    were selected by the TAP group as possible candidates for the
    program. Out of the ten villages identified, Gambell was selected as
    the first community for the program. The Native Village of Gambell
    is located on St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea, approximately
    200 miles southwest of Nome. Most of the 660 people who live in
    Gambell are Yup'ik Eskimos. The Yup'ik name for Gambell is Sivuqaq.
    ^9^ Gambell remains one of the most traditional villages in Alaska,
    with a subsistence lifestyle based on the hunting of marine mammals.
    The drinking water for Gambell comes from a surface water source and
    is treated by filtration and disinfection. The mayor of Gambell,
    along with the members of the traditional council were invited to
    attend the monthly TAP meeting in August, 2006. The mayor and
    traditional council agreed to participate in the process and have
    attended each meeting since August. During the first meeting, goals
    were developed and to date, many of those goals have been met.
    Gambell has been an excellent partner and they are determined to
    ensure that the villagers are provided with safe drinking water. The
    village has returned to compliance with the Drinking Water
    Regulations and will continue to attend monthly meetings with the
    TAP to immediately address any problems that might arise. During the
    January 2007 TAP meeting, another village will be selected to begin
    the process.

> **4. DW Program staff to receive cross-cultural training.** The DW
> Program Management staff has reviewed several options for delivering
> cross-cultural training to staff. The DW Program has purchased a
> four-part video series entitled "Communicating across Cultures". This
> series features Russian Orthodox priest, Father Michael Oleska, who is
> a well-known expert on Alaska Native culture. Staff have been
> scheduled to attend training in each of the DW Program offices during
> January 2007.
>
> **5. DW Program communication plan will be amended to enhance
> communications with villages.** The TAP have identified a major
> problem with the DW Program's communication plan. Many of the
> documents are full of regulatory language that is difficult for the
> villagers to understand and comprehend. DW Program staff have begun
> the process of simplifying letters and other written communication. A
> template letter has been drafted and is being used by all of the
> program offices. The annual Monitoring Summary, the main communication
> that PWS's receive from the DW Program is also being reformatted and
> revised.
>
> **6.** **Reduce historic EPA SNC List by 50% by 2009.** This goal
> remains to be accomplished. The DW Program plans to address at least
> ten village PWS during fiscal year 2007. The DW Program is also in the
> process of hiring more staff which will make it easier to address more
> village systems through the TAP process.
>
> **CONCLUSIONS:**
>
> To date, significant progress has been made by the DW Program and the
> TAP in establishing a new framework for addressing public water system
> capacity problems in villages. This remains an enormous task and it
> will require more time to complete the process. When this project
> began, it was estimated that it would take at least three years to
> address fifty percent of the villages on the historic EPA SNC List.
> The reality is that there will most likely always be some percentage
> of village PWS on the historic EPA SNC List because of social,
> economic and geographical conditions encountered in the State.
> However, I am confident that the process being implemented as a major
> part of this project will result in a significant decrease in the
> number of PWS on the historic EPA SNC List and therefore, a
> significant increase in the number of systems providing safe drinking
> water to their residents. The following items need to be completed to
> continue the project's success:
>
> • Continue to build meaningful partnerships with other TAP's. To date,
> many of the major state and federal agencies have been attending the
> monthly TAP meetings. The TAP must continue to build on this success
> and bring more providers into the process.
>
> • Identify additional villages that would benefit from the TAP
> process. Presently, only one village has been selected to receive the
> additional assistance provided by this process. More villages need to
> be added to the process in order to significantly reduce the number of
> villages on the historic EPA SNC List.
>
> • Review the diagnostic tool that has been developed to ensure its
> accuracy in predicting capacity problems in village PWS. Continue to
> revise the diagnostic tool as the program is implemented to include
> additional villages.
>
> • Enhance the working relationship between the DW Program and VSW and
> ANTHC which will improve coordination in the construction of PWS in
> villages.
>
> • Work with the EPA Region 10 Office of Drinking Water to develop a
> definition of "significant compliance" for the villages.
>
> • Foster mentoring relationships between the villages that have
> benefited from the TAP process.
>
> **LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES:**
>
> Being a member of the Environmental Public Health Leadership Institute
> has been an exciting and wonderful experience, both personally and
> professionally. It has revitalized interests that I had developed
> while completing my Master's degree in Public Administration. Public
> policy development and implementation have always been interesting to
> me and the opportunity to be exposed to new policy trends and systems
> thinking has been invaluable. I am especially grateful for the
> opportunity to be able to share what I have learned at EPHLI with my
> staff and co-workers here at ADEC. Thank you for providing the
> opportunity to participate in the second class of the Environmental
> Public Health Institute; it has been an amazing year.
>
> **ABOUT THE EHPLI FELLOW**
>
> ***Cindy L. Christian, B.A., MPA***
>
> Cindy Christian has been employed at the Alaska Department of
> Environmental Conservation since 1999 and serves as the Field
> Operations and Implementation Manager for the Drinking Water Program.
> The Field Operations and Implementation group consists of 22 staff
> members who are responsible for the direct implementation of the Safe
> Drinking Water Act and Amendments within the State of Alaska. She is
> responsible for providing program management and development,
> regulation implementation, compliance and technical assistance,
> enforcement and public outreach. Ms. Christian holds a Bachelor of
> Arts Degree in Biology and Chemistry from Lycoming College and a
> Masters of Public Administration Degree from the University of La
> Verne.
>
> **REFERENCES**

1.  McClanahan, Alexandra J., Bisset, Hallie L. (2004) [Na'eda Our
    Friends: A Guide to Alaska Native Corporations, Tribes, Cultures,
    ANSCA and More]{.underline}, The CIRI Foundation, Anchorage, Alaska.

2.  Fortuine, Robert (1992) [Chills and Fever: Health and Disease in the
    Early History of Alaska]{.underline}, University of Alaska Press,
    Fairbanks, Alaska.

3.  State of Alaska Administrative Code, State of Alaska Drinking Water
    Regulations, 18 AAC 80.207.

4.  Osaki, C. *Essential Services of Environmental Health.* Northwest
    Center for Public Health Practice, University of Washington School
    of Public Health and Community Medicine, Seattle, WA. July 2004

5.  Centers for Disease Control. *Health Protection Goals.* Atlanta, GA:
    Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease
    Control. April 2006

6.  U. S. Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Disease
    Prevention & Human Services. *Healthy People 2010.* Available at:
    [http://www.healthypeople.gov](http://www.healthypeople.gov/)

7.  State of Alaska, Department of Health and Social Services. *Healthy
    Alaskans 2010: Targets and Strategies for Improved Health*.
    Anchorage, AK. December 2001.

8.  Centers for Disease Control. *A National Strategy to Revitalize
    Environmental Public Health Services.* Atlanta, GA: Department of
    Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control, September
    2003.

9.  State of Alaska, Department of Community and Economic Development,
    Division of Community Advocacy. *Alaska Community Database --
    Community Information Summaries.* Available at:
    <http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/dca/commdb/CIS.cfm>