National Water 

Program Guidance 

Office of Water 

Fiscal Year 2012 

April 2011 
Table of Contents 

 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... i 



I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 



II. Strategies to Protect Public Health ................................................................................................. 5 



1. Water Safe to Drink ....................................................................................................................... 5 



2. Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat ........................................................................................................14 



3. Water Safe for Swimming............................................................................................................. 15 



III.Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands...........................17 



1. Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis................................................................................... 17 



2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters ............................................................................................... 27 



3. Increase Wetlands ....................................................................................................................... 29 



IV. Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems .............................................. 33 



1. Improve the Health of the Great Lakes ........................................................................................... 33 



2. Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay..................................................................................... 35 



3. Restore and Protect the Gulf of Mexico .......................................................................................... 37 



4. Restore and Protect Long Island Sound .......................................................................................... 39 



5. Restore and Protect the Puget Sound Basin .................................................................................... 41 



6. Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health..................................................... 43 



7. Sustain and Restore Pacific Islands Territories .................................................................................. 44 



8. Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem............................................................................. 45 



9. Restore and Protect the Columbia River Basin ................................................................................. 47 



10. San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary .................................................................................................. 48 



V. National Water Program and Grant Management System ............................................................ 51 



VI.Water Program and Environmental Justice.................................................................................... 57 



VII. Water Program and Children’s Health ......................................................................................... 61 



VIII.National Water Program and the Urban Waters Effort................................................................62 



IX.National Water Program and Climate Change...............................................................................63 



X. National Water Program and Tribes ...............................................................................................65 



A) FY 2012 National Water Program Guidance Measures Summary 

B) Office of Water American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Measures 

C) Explanation of Key Changes Summary 

D) Additional Guidance for Section 106 State and Interstate Grant Recipients 

Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 66 



E) FY 2012 Detailed Measures Appendix 

F) Work Sharing Between EPA and States - Examples and Best Practices 



 

	 	 	

	 	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

	 

Executive Summary �



I. PROGRAM OFFICE: NATIONAL WATER PROGRAM 

This National Water Program Guidance (Guidance) for fiscal 

year (FY) 2012 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 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. 

II. INTRODUCTION/CONTEXT 

The Guidance describes the key actions needed to accomplish the public health and environmental goals in the EPA 

FY 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, published on September 30, 

2010. These goals are: 

• 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. 

III. WATER PROGRAM PRIORITIES 

The Office of Water 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. 

From a national perspective, however, EPA, states, and 

tribes need to give special attention in FY 2012 to the priority areas identified below to ensure safe and clean water 

for all Americans. These priorities of the National Water 

Program are organized into two themes, Sustainable Communities and Healthy Watersheds: 

1.	Sustainable Communities – Making Communities More 

Sustainable 

• Making America’s Water Systems Sustainable and Secure 

• Safeguarding Public Health 

• Restoring and Protecting Urban Waters 

2.	Healthy Watersheds – Restoring and Protecting America’s Watersheds 

• Focusing Efforts in Key Geographic Areas 

• Strengthening Protections for Our Waters 

• Improving Watershed-Based Approaches 

In addition, the National Water Program is working to support the Administrator’s key priorities of Taking Action on 

Climate Change, Assuring the Safety of Chemicals, Expanding the Conversation of Environmentalism and Working For 

Environmental Justice, and Building Strong State and Tribal 

Partnerships through participation in the Agency’s crosscutting fundamental strategies. More information on these 

priorities is provided in the Introduction to this Guidance. 

IV. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 

The National Water Program Guidance describes, in general 

terms, the work that needs to be done in FY 2012 to reach 

the public health and water quality goals that are proposed 

in the EPA 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. In the Guidance, these 

public health and environmental goals are organized into 15 

“subobjectives,” and each of the subobjectives is supported 

by a specific implementation strategy that includes the following key elements: 

•		 Environmental/Public Health Results Expected. Each 

subobjective strategy begins with a brief review of 

national goals for improvements in environmental conditions or public health, including national “targets” for 

progress in FY 2012. 

• Key Strategies. For each subobjective, the key strategies 

for accomplishing environmental goals are described. The 

role of core programs (e.g. State Revolving Funds, water 

quality standards, discharge permits, development of safe 

drinking water standards, and source water protection) is 

discussed and a limited number of key program activity 

measures are identified. A comprehensive summary, listing 

all strategic target and program activity annual measures 

under each subobjective, is in Appendix A. 

• FY 2012 Targets for Key Program Activities. For some of 

the program activities, EPA, states, and tribes will simply 

report progress accomplished in FY 2012 while for other 

activities, each EPA region will define specific “targets” 

(Appendix E). These targets are a point of reference for the 

development of more binding commitments to measurable 

progress in state and tribal grant workplans. In the Guidance, national or programmatic targets are shown, where 

applicable, in Appendices A and E. 

• Grant Assistance. Each of the subobjective strategies 

includes a brief discussion of EPA grant assistance that 

supports the program activities identified in the strategy. 

Section 106 Grant Guidance for Water Pollution Control 

Programs is incorporated within the Water Quality Subobjective and Appendix D to streamline the approach to the 

grant guidance issuance. The National Water Program’s 

approach to managing grants for FY 2012 is discussed in 

Part V of this Guidance. In FY 2011, EPA incorporated the 

grant guidance for the Public Water System Supervision 

(PWSS) and Underground Injection Control (UIC) grants 

within the Water Safe to Drink Subobjective to continue 

to pilot a more streamlined approach to issuing the grant 

guidance. 

National Water Program Guidance i	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

	 	 	

	 	 	

	 

Executive Summary 

•		 Environmental Justice (EJ). For FY 2012, the Office 

of Water is continuing to align the development of this 

Guidance with the development of the EJ Action Plan 

and the implementation of elements of the cross-cutting 

fundamental strategy, Working for Environmental Justice 

and Children’s Health. The year 2010 ushered in a new era 

that raised the level of outreach and protection of historically underrepresented and vulnerable subpopulations 

to a top priority for all Agency activities. To undertake 

this top priority, environmental justice principles must 

be included in our entire decision making processes. 

Expanding the conversation on environmentalism and 

working for environmental justice is a key priority for the 

National Water Program. 

•		 A Strategic Response to a Changing Climate. The EPA 

Office of Water released the National Water Program 

Strategy: Response to Climate Change in September 2008. 

The Strategy describes the impacts of climate change (e.g. 

warming water temperatures, changes in rainfall amounts 

and intensity, and sea level rise) and their implications 

for EPA’s clean water and drinking water programs. 

Additional information on the Strategy and the National 

Water Program’s efforts to build a resilient program are 

in Section IX as well as at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/ 

climatechange/index.cfm. 

V. MEASURES 

The National Water Program uses three types of measures 

to assess progress toward the proposed goals in the EPA 

2011-2015 Strategic Plan: 

• Measures of changes in environmental or public health 

(i.e., outcome measures); 

• Measures of activities to implement core national water 

programs (i.e., program activity measures); and 

• Measures of activities to restore and protect large aquatic 

ecosystems and implement other water program priorities in each EPA region (i.e., ecosystem outcome and 

program activity measures). 

From 2006 – 2010, EPA worked with states and tribes to 

align and streamline performance measures. The National 

Water Program will continue to engage states and tribes 

in the Agency’s performance measurement improvement 

efforts. 

VI. TRACKING PROGRESS 

The National Water Program will evaluate progress toward 

the environmental and public health goals described in the 

EPA Strategic Plan using four key tools: 

•		 National Water Program Performance Reports: The 

Office of Water will use data provided by EPA regional 

offices, states, and tribes to prepare performance reports 

for the National Water Program at the mid-point and end 

of each fiscal year. 

•		 Senior Management and DA Measures: The Office of 

Water reports the results on a subset of the National 

Water Program Guidance measures to the Deputy Administrator. In addition, headquarters and regional senior 

managers are held accountable for a select group of 

the Guidance measures in their annual performance 

assessments. 

•		 EPA Headquarters (HQ)/Regional Dialogues: Each year, 

the Office of Water will visit up to three EPA regional 

offices and Great Waterbody offices to conduct dialogues 

on program management, grant management, and 

performance. 

•		 Program-Specific Evaluations: In addition to looking at 

the performance of the National Water Program at the 

national level and performance in each EPA region, evaluations will be conducted internally by program managers 

at EPA headquarters and regional offices; and externally 

by the EPA Inspector General, Government Accountability Office, and other independent organizations. 

VII. PROGRAM CONTACTS 

For additional information concerning this Guidance and 

supporting measures, please contact: 

• Michael H. Shapiro; Deputy Assistant Administrator 

for Water 

• Tim Fontaine; Senior Budget Officer, Office of Water 

• Vinh T. T. Nguyen; Program Planning Team Leader, Office 

of Water 

Internet Access: This FY 2012 National Water Program Guidance and supporting documents are available at 

http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan. 

National Water Program Guidance ii	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	

 

	 	 	 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	


 

	 

Introduction 

I. Introduction 

Clean and Safe Water Goals for 2015 

T

he EPA 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, published in September of 2010, defines specific environmental and 

public health improvements to be accomplished by 

2015. With the help of states, tribes, and other partners, 

EPA expects to make significant progress toward protecting 

human health and improving water quality by 2015 for the 

following key areas: 

Protect Public Health 

•		 Water Safe to Drink: Maintain current high percentage 

of the population served by systems meeting healthbased Drinking Water standards; 

•		 Fish Safe to Eat: Reduce the percentage of women of 

child-bearing age having mercury levels in their blood 

above levels of concern; and 

•		 Water Safe for Swimming: Maintain the currently high 

percentage of days that beaches are open and safe for 

swimming during the beach season. 

Restore and Protect Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, 

and Wetlands 

•		 Healthy Waters: Address an increasing number of the 

approximately 40,000 impaired waters identified by the 

states in 2002; 

• Healthy Coastal Waters: Show improvement in the 

overall condition of the nation’s coastal waters while at 

least maintaining conditions in the four major coastal 

regions and in Hawaii and the South Central Alaska 

Region; and 

•		 More Wetlands: Restore, improve, and protect wetlands 

with the goal of increasing the overall quantity and quality of the nation’s wetlands and reduce the loss of coastal 

wetlands. 

Restore and Protect the Health of 

Large Aquatic Ecosystems 

Implement collaborative programs with other federal agencies and with states, tribes, local governments, and others 

to improve the health of communities and large aquatic 

ecosystems including: 

• the Great Lakes · U.S.-Mexico Border waters 

• the Chesapeake Bay · Pacific Island waters 

• the Gulf of Mexico · South Florida waters 

• Long Island Sound · the Columbia River Basin 

• the Puget Sound · the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 

Purpose and Structure of this FY 2012 Guidance 

This National Program Guidance defines the process for creating an “operational plan” for EPA, state, and tribal water 

programs for FY 2012. This Guidance is divided into three 

major sections: 

1.	Subobjective Implementation Strategies: The EPA 2011-

2015 Strategic Plan addresses water programs in Goal 2, 

Protecting America’s Waters. Within Goal 2, there are 12 

subobjectives that define specific environmental or public 

health results to be accomplished by the National Water 

Program by the end of FY 2015. This Guidance is organized into 15 subobjectives and describes the increment 

of environmental progress EPA hopes to make in FY 2012 

for each subobjective and the program strategies to be 

used to accomplish these goals. 

The National Water Program is working with EPA’s 

Innovation Action Council (IAC) to promote program 

innovations, including the Environmental Management 

Systems (EMS) (www.epa.gov/ems/) and the Environmental Results Program (ERP) (www.epa.gov/ 

erp/index.htm). States and tribes may be able to use 

these or other innovative tools in program planning and 

implementation. 

2.	Water Measures: Appendix A, a comprehensive list of performance measures in the Guidance, includes three types 

of measures that support the subobjective strategies and 

are used to manage water programs: 

•		 “Outcome” Strategic Target Measures: Measures of 

environmental or public health changes (i.e. outcomes) 

are described in the EPA Strategic Plan and include 

long-range targets for this Guidance. These measures are 

described in the opening section of each of the subobjective plan summaries in this Guidance. 

•		 National Program Activity Measures: Core water program activity measures (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 FY 2012 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 2011. 

•		 Ecosystem Program Activity Measures: These measures 

address activities to restore and protect communities 

and large aquatic ecosystems and implement other water 

program priorities in EPA regional offices. 

Over the past eight years, EPA has worked with the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) to evaluate key water 

programs using the OMB Program Assessment reviews. This 

work included identifying measures of progress for each 

program. Most of the measures identified in the OMB Program Assessment process are included in this Guidance. 

National Water Program Guidance 1	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Introduction 

3.	Water Program Management System: Part V of this 

Guidance describes a three-step process for management 

of water programs in FY 2012: 

• Step 1 is the development of this National Water 

Program Guidance. 

• Step 2 involves consultation among EPA regions, states, 

and tribes, to be conducted during the spring/summer 2011, to convert the “targets” in this Guidance 

into regional “commitments” that are supported by 

grant workplans and other agreements 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 2012. 

• Step 3 involves work to be done during FY 2012 to assess 

progress in program implementation and improve program performance. 

In FY 2010, the grant guidance for the Water Pollution Control Grants from Section 106 of the Clean Water Act (Section 

106 grants) was incorporated into the National Water Program 

Guidance. This was a pilot effort started in FY 2010 to gain 

efficiency in the issuance of the Section 106 Grant Guidance within the Guidance. Text boxes with specific Section 

106 guidance are incorporated within Section III, 1 (Restore 

and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of this 

Guidance. Appendix D has additional information for states 

and the interstate agencies. The Tribal Program, Monitoring 

Initiative, and Water Pollution Enforcement Activities are not 

included in this pilot, and grantees should follow the specific, 

separate guidances for these programs. In FY 2011, this pilot 

effort continued with the integration of the grant guidance 

for the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) and Underground Injection Control (UIC) grants. These grant guidance 

sections were incorporated in the Water Safe to Drink Subobjective in the final FY 2011 Guidance. 

FY 2012 National Water Program Priorities 

The Office of Water recognizes that EPA regions, states, and 

tribes need flexibility in determining the best allocation 

of program resources for achieving clean water goals given 

their specific needs and condition. From a national perspective, however, EPA, states, and tribes need to give special 

attention in FY 2012 to the priority areas identified below 

to protect America’s waters. The Office of Water has two 

organizing themes for the National Water Program, Sustainable Communities and Healthy Watersheds. 

1.	Sustainable Communities:	 The nation’s water resources 

are the lifeblood of the nation’s communities, supporting the economy and way of life. For communities to be 

sustainable, water resources must be sustainable as well. 

•		 Making America’s Water Systems Sustainable and 

Secure: The nation’s water infrastructure needs are 

substantial, and the ability to meet those needs through 

traditional programs and funding is limited. EPA is working with partners to help communities and utilities continue to provide for their residents by improving access to 

financing, management practices, and use of innovative 

solutions such as green infrastructure and expansion 

of the WaterSense program. Recovery Act funds and 

increases in the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Act 

State Revolving Funds have already boosted these efforts. 

While making water systems more sustainable, EPA also 

wants to fortify their security and resiliency by working 

with water utilities to prevent or minimize disruptions 

in providing clean and safe water for all citizens. The 

National Water Program will build upon the successes 

of the sustainable water infrastructure work to address 

the needs of disadvantaged urban, rural, and tribal 

communities. 

•		 Safeguarding Public Health: Using science-based standards to protect public water systems as well as ground 

and surface water bodies has long been an Office of Water 

priority. Protecting public health through tools, such as 

beach, fish consumption and drinking water advisories, is 

part of EPA’s core mission. EPA is expanding that science 

to improve our understanding of emerging potential 

threats to public health to bring a new sense of responsiveness to public needs. By also working closely with the 

enforcement program, the National Water Program can 

ensure safe drinking water and surface water suitable for 

recreation for all Americans. 

•		 Restoring and Protecting Urban Waters: With the water 

program’s new Urban Waters Effort, EPA can help communities, especially those that are underserved and those 

with environmental justice concerns, to access, restore, 

and benefit from their local urban waters and surrounding land. By focusing on building capacity and pairing 

urban water quality restoration with community revitalization, the National Water Program is helping to make 

these communities more vibrant and strengthening the 

connections between a healthy environment and a healthy 

economy. Additional information on the Urban Waters 

Effort is in Section VIII. 

2.	Healthy Watersheds: People and the natural ecosystems 

both rely on the health of watersheds. By improving programs and tools to protect watersheds, EPA is protecting 

human health as well as the environment. 

•		 Focusing Efforts in Key Geographic Areas: America’s 

largest aquatic ecosystems are seriously impaired, resulting in significant losses to the diversity and productivity 

of these systems and risks to the socio-economic wellbeing of communities. The National Water Program is 

leading efforts to restore and protect these treasured 

resources, and in so doing is providing models for broader 

national applicability. The Great Lakes Restoration 

National Water Program Guidance 2
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Introduction 

Initiative, the Chesapeake Bay Executive Order and Strategy, the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Action Plan, the federal 

Bay-Delta Workplan, and the National Ocean Policy are 

each designed to help communities in these key geographic areas address complex transboundary challenges. 

By engaging in innovative, collaborative approaches with 

federal, state, tribal, and local government and non-governmental partners, and making robust use of existing 

statutory authority, EPA helps make these programs 

more effective and restore these precious resources. 

•		 Strengthening Protections for Our Waters: America’s 

waterbodies are imperiled as never before, but EPA has 

the tools to help repair them. EPA and its partners can 

provide better protection of the nation’s water resources, 

including sources of drinking water by strengthening 

criteria and revising regulations. Some examples are by 

revising the stormwater rule, updating effluent guideline 

limitations for construction and development and the 

steam electric sectors, taking action to reduce the harmful environmental consequences of mountaintop mining, 

and strengthening protection for wetlands and other 

waters of the United States. EPA will continue to work 

with the states, tribes, and others to improve monitoring 

of waters so that we are better able to measure progress 

in protecting and restoring them. EPA is also working 

closely with the enforcement program to focus on the biggest threats to the nation’s water resources. 

•		Improving Watershed-Based Approaches: Complex 

issues, such as nonpoint source and nutrient pollution, 

require holistic, integrated solutions that emphasize 

accountability. 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”, EPA believes 

that nitrogen and phosphorus pollution is one of the 

most serious and pervasive water quality problems. In 

2012, 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 (N) and phosphorus (P) pollution. EPA managers 

should also continue working with states to help develop 

numeric criteria for nitrogen and phosphorus, so that 

states have clearly measurable, objective metrics to guide 

long-term pollution reduction efforts and adaptively manage towards achieving long-term goals. (See http://water. 

epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/nutrients/upload/memo_nitrogen_framework.pdf.) 

The National Water Program will improve the way existing tools, such as water quality standards, protection 

of downstream uses, permits and total maximum daily 

loads, are used to protect and restore watersheds; explore 

how innovative tools, such as trading and other marketbased approaches to watershed protection, can be applied; 

and enhance efforts to prevent water quality impairments 

in healthy watersheds. Local partners are becoming more 

important than ever to the health of watersheds and estuaries, and EPA must improve outreach to them to help 

them build their capacity to develop and implement their 

own solutions to local water quality problems. 

These National Water Program priorities directly support 

the Administrator’s priority, Protecting America’s Waters. 

In addition, the National Water Program supports the 

Administrator’s following priority themes: 

Taking Action on Climate Change 

Climate change will affect multiple aspects of the National 

Water Program, including threatening infrastructure investment, exacerbating water quality problems, compounding 

stress to aquatic ecosystems, and placing the health and 

well-being of vulnerable populations at increased risk. EPA 

must continue to work with partners to identify ways to 

control greenhouse gas emissions through energy and water 

efficiency, make programs more resilient through initiatives 

such as the Climate Ready Estuaries program and Climate 

Ready Water Utilities, and help adapt base water programs 

to impacts from a changing climate. 

A Strategic Response to a Changing Climate: In September 

of 2008, the National Water Program published a Strategy 

for responding to the impacts of climate change on clean 

water and drinking water programs (see water.epa.gov/ 

scitech/climatechange/index.cfm). Key goals of the Strategy 

are to help water program managers recognize the impacts 

of climate change on water programs (e.g. warming water 

temperatures, changes in rainfall amounts and intensity, and 

sea level rise) and to identify needed adaptation actions. 

Additional information on the Strategy is in Section IX. 

Assuring the Safety of Chemicals 

The Office of Water will partner with the Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) to accelerate testing of potential endocrine disrupting chemicals that can be 

present in water supplies and surface waters. 

Expanding the Conversation on Environmentalism 

and Working for Environmental Justice 

As part of the federal government, EPA must ensure that 

communities disproportionately affected by pollution 

have clean and safe water, and that environmental justice 

informs decision-making, including permitting and standards decisions. The Assistant Administrator of the Office 

of Water wants to underscore those principles and asks that 

we strive to incorporate them in our work. In addition to 

the Urban Waters effort which can benefit disadvantaged 

communities, the Office of Water co-leads and actively 

participates in EPA’s Community Action for a Renewed 

Environment (CARE) program. CARE is providing on-theground technical assistance and funding to underserved 

communities to help them understand, prioritize, and 

address environmental health threats from all sources. 

National Water Program Guidance 3
 Fiscal Year 2012 
Introduction 

Building Strong State and Tribal Partnerships 

EPA recognizes that states and tribes are key partners in 

implementing the National Water Program. States write 

the overwhelming majority of water permits, water quality 

standards, and total maximum daily loads. Similarly, most 

inspections are done by states. EPA has begun working 

to improve this partnership through increased collaboration on key problems, such as nutrients, and by providing greater opportunity to discuss strategic and program 

planning through the Partnership Council of the Office of 

Water and the States. The Office of Water is also committed to improving tribal access to safe drinking water and 

sanitation, and to improve tribes’ capacities to assume 

greater responsibility for waters within their jurisdiction. 

The National Tribal Water Council is a key mechanism for 

ensuring that the views of tribal water professionals are 

considered in EPA’s regulatory and other programs. 

EPA, states, and tribes also need to pay special attention to 

regional priorities. EPA regional offices identified a limited 

number of regional and state priorities. These priorities 

were based upon geographic areas and performance measures that were established to support the priorities. Many 

of the performance measures developed by these regional 

groups support the National Water Program national 

priorities. 

Improving Enforcement of the Clean Water Act 

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 water quality impairment. The Office of Water is 

currently working with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), EPA regions, and states to implement the Action Plan. The Action Plan’s three key elements 

are to: 1) focus NPDES enforcement efforts on pollution 

sources that pose the greatest threats to water quality; 2) 

strengthen oversight of state permitting and enforcement 

programs; and 3) improve the accessibility and quality of 

information provided to the public. 

Since work under the Action Plan is ongoing as this Guidance is finalized, FY 2012 will be a transition year. EPA 

anticipates that existing policies, strategies and regulations, 

may need to be revised to better identify and address the 

key water quality problems where NPDES compliance and 

enforcement efforts are critical components to protection 

and restoration. EPA also expects that the implementation 

of the Action Plan will identify more immediate opportunities to improve identification of serious noncompliance 

problems as well as new approaches to address these violations. For more information on specific enforcement actions 

for 2012, please see the 2012 OECA National Program guidance at www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/index.htm. 

Priority Performance Goals 

As part of the FY 2011 budget process, EPA developed Priority Performance Goals around FY 2011 budget priorities 

and the Administrator’s priorities. For the National Water 

Program, two Priority Performance Goals were developed 

with OMB, for quarterly reporting beginning in FY 2010, to 

track the development of state watershed implementation 

plans in support of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum 

Daily Load (TMDL) and the review of drinking water standards to strengthen public health protection. These Priority 

Performance Goals continue into FY 2012. 

Sustainability 

The Office of Water supports the Administrator’s emphasis 

on sustainability and through a collaborative process with 

other EPA offices and regions will strive to continuously 

improve our processes to leverage sustainability concepts 

in achieving OW’s mission. Sustainability as a management 

process emphasizes need for systems-based, integrated 

tools for assistance, permitting and enforcement. As just 

one example in one region, Region 1 which has created a 

functional cross-office team designed to identify how existing EPA approaches and tools can most effectively address 

stormwater run-off. The Region has selected a combination of assistance, permitting and enforcement, and BMP/ 

technology-driving tools to promote long-term sustainable 

outcomes. Under MS4 compliance for example, the Region 

is targeting enforcement, low impact develop SEPs and 

assistance (this, through a series of MS4 Compliance/LID 

workshops) all designed to promote long-term green infrastructure changes in municipal approaches to compliance 

and land use practices. Additionally, EPA will continue its 

efforts to promote and educate drinking water and wastewater systems on sustainability practices, such as asset 

management and water and energy efficiency, in order to 

facilitate their long-term sustainability. For such examples 

to become operational norm, having common understanding of these concepts across all staff will be critical moving 

forward. Sustainability is also an opportunity to improve 

communications with the public as to how human health 

and environmental protection may continue to move forward in a smarter manner able to achieve greater benefits at 

same or lower cost. 

National Water Program Guidance 4 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 


 


 


 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

II. Strategies To Protect Public Health 

F

or each of the key subobjectives related to water addressed in the EPA Strategic Plan, 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 National Program Guidance draws from the Strategic Plan but describes plans 

and strategies at a more operational level and focuses on FY 2012. In addition, this Guidance refers to “Program Activity 

Measures” that define key program activities that support each subobjective (see Appendix A and E). 

1. Water Safe to Drink 

A) Subobjective 

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. 

2005 Baseline: 89%	 2011 Commitment: 91%	
 

2012 Target: 91%
 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Program Strategies 

For more than 30 years, protecting the nation’s public 

health through safe drinking water has been the shared 

responsibility of EPA, the states, and 52,873 CWSs1 nationwide that supply drinking water to more than 300 million 

Americans (approximately 95% of the U.S. population). 

Over this time, drinking water standards have been established and are being implemented for 91 microbial, chemical, and other contaminants. Forty-nine states and the 

Navajo Nation have adopted primary authority for enforcing their drinking water programs. Additionally, CWS operators are better informed and trained on the variety of ways 

to both treat contaminants and prevent them from entering 

the source of their drinking water supplies. 

EPA, states, tribes, and CWSs will work together so that 

the population served by CWSs receives drinking water 

that meets all health-based standards. This goal reflects 

the fundamental public health protection mission of the 

national drinking water program. Health protection-based 

regulatory standards for drinking water quality are the 

cornerstone of the program. The standards do not prescribe 

a specific treatment approach; rather, individual systems 

decide how best to comply with any given standard based on 

their own unique circumstances. Systems meet standards by 

employing “multiple barriers of protection” including source 

water protection, various stages of treatment, proper operation and maintenance of the distribution and finished water 

storage system, and customer awareness. 

The overall objective of the drinking water program is to 

protect public health by ensuring that public water systems 

deliver safe drinking water to their customers. To achieve 

this objective the program must work to maintain the gains 

of the previous years’ efforts; drinking water systems of all 

types and sizes that are currently in compliance will work to 

remain in compliance. Efforts will be made to bring noncomplying systems into compliance and to assure all systems will be prepared to comply with the new regulations. 

Making sound decisions to allocate resources among various 

program areas requires that each EPA region first work with 

states and tribes to define goals for the program in public 

health (i.e., “outcome”) terms. The table below describes 

estimates of progress under the key drinking water measure 

describing the percent of the population served by community water systems that receive water that meets all healthbased drinking water standards. 

Targets for Population Served by Systems Meeting 

Standards (Measure SDW-211) 

EPA Region 

2005 

Baseline 

2010 

Actual 

2011 Commitment 2012 

Target 

1 92.5% 91.3% 89% 89% 

2 55.3% 82.4% 76% 76% 

3 93.2% 96.6% 90% 90% 

4 93% 94.2% 93% 92% 

5 94.1% 93.2% 93% 94% 

6 87.8% 90.3% 87% 87% 

7 91.2% 81.6% 85% 90% 

8 94.7% 93.2% 91% 91% 

9 94.6% 96% 95% 95% 

10 94.8% 92.2% 91% 91% 

National 

Total 89% 91.4% 91% 91%* 

* The national target is 91% while the regional aggregate is 90%. 

1 Although the Safe Drinking Water Act applies to 159,945 public water systems nationwide (as of October 2010), which include schools, hospitals, factories, campgrounds, motels, gas stations, etc. that have their own water system, this implementation plan focuses only on CWSs. A community water 

system (CWS) is a public water system that provides water to the same population year-round. As of October 2010, there were 52,873 CWSs. 

National Water Program Guidance 5
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 		

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

Although EPA regions should use the national FY 2012 

target of the population served by community water systems receiving safe drinking water as a point of reference, 

regional commitments to this outcome goal may vary based 

on differing circumstances in each EPA region. 

EPA, states, and tribes support the efforts of individual 

water systems by providing a programmatic framework 

through the core programs they implement. Core national 

program areas that are critical to ensuring safe drinking 

water are: 

• Development or revision of drinking water standards; 

• Implementation of drinking water standards and technical assistance to water systems to enhance their technical, managerial, and financial capacity; 

• Drinking Water State Revolving Fund; 

• Water system security; 

• Protecting sources of drinking water; and 

• Underground injection control (UIC). 

Collectively, these core areas of the national safe drinking 

water program comprise the multiple-barrier approach to 

protecting public health. In each of these areas, specific Program Activity Measures indicate progress being made and 

some measures include “targets” for FY 2012. For measures 

with targets, a national target and a target for each EPA 

region, where applicable, are provided in Appendix A and E. 

1.	Development/Revision of Drinking 

Water Standards 

In FY 2012, the Agency will assess the available information 

on health effects and contaminant occurrence in drinking 

water to determine which Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 

3) chemicals and/or pathogens have sufficient information 

on which to base a regulatory decision. EPA will work to 

compile this information to make regulatory determinations for at least five CCL 3 contaminants in 2012. The 

Agency will also continue to evaluate and address drinking water risks through activities that implement the Safe 

Drinking Water Act (SDWA) including: 

• Following recommendations provided to EPA in the 

Total Coliform Rule/Distribution System Federal Advisory Committee’s Agreement in Principle, EPA proposed 

revisions to the Total Coliform Rule (TCR) in FY 2010. 

The Agency has been evaluating the public comments 

on the proposed revisions to the TCR and is preparing 

responses. EPA will publish a final revised Total Coliform 

Rule 2012. 

• EPA will continue to provide technical and scientific support for the development and implementation of drinking water regulations. 

Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Grant 

Guidance to States, Tribes, and EPA Regions 

with Primacy Enforcement Authority 

This National Water Program Guidance for FY 2012 includes 

guidance for state and tribal recipients of Public Water System 

Supervision (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, sub-objectives, strategic targets, and program 

activity measures specified in Section III.1 of 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 overall objective of the PWSS program grant is to protect 

public health by ensuring that: 

•	 Drinking water systems, of all types, and of all sizes, that are 

currently in compliance, remain in compliance; 

•	 Drinking water systems, of all types, and of all sizes, that are 

not currently in compliance, achieve compliance; 

•	 Drinking water systems, of all types, and of all sizes, are 

preparing to comply with new drinking water regulations 

that will be taking effect in FY 2012. 

A proportion of each PWSS grant should be devoted to 

ensuring that data quality and other data problems are being 

addressed. Specifically that: 

•	 Water system compliance determinations are consistent 

with federal and state regulations; and 

•	 The required inventory, compliance, and enforcement data 

being provided to EPA are accurate and complete. 

In accordance with EPA Order 5700.6A2, Policy on Compliance, Review and Monitoring, effective January 1, 2008, EPA 

regions must develop and carry out a post-award monitoring 

plan and conduct baseline monitoring for every award. This 

monitoring should ensure satisfaction of five core areas: (1) 

compliance with all programmatic terms and conditions; (2) 

correlation of the recipient’s work plan/application and actual 

progress under the award; (3) availability of funds to complete 

the project, (4) proper management of and accounting for 

equipment purchased under the award, and (5) compliance 

with all statutory and regulatory requirements of the program. 

In addition, this monitoring should inform Regional decisions 

under 40 CFR 142.17 as authorized under Section 1413 of the 

Safe Drinking Water Act. 

The PWSS grant allotments are based on factors such as population, geographic area, and PWS 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. 

• EPA proposed the third round of unregulated contaminant monitoring (UCMR 3) in FY 2011. The initial review 

of the comments received on the proposed UCMR 3 commenced in FY 2011 and continues in FY 2012. EPA will 

National Water Program Guidance 6 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health 	 Water Safe to Drink 

publish the final UCMR 3 in FY 2012. EPA is required by 

Section 1452(o) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 

as amended, to annually set-aside $2 million of State 

Revolving Funds to pay the costs of small system monitoring and sample analysis for contaminants for each 

cycle of the UCMR. 

• As stated previously, EPA has been evaluating the 

contaminants on the third drinking water Contaminant 

Candidate List (CCL 3). EPA is assessing data on health 

effects, occurrence, analytical methods, and treatment 

technologies for the CCL 3 contaminants, to determine 

which, if any, CCL 3 contaminants are appropriate for 

regulation. EPA will publish Preliminary Regulatory 

Determinations to regulate or not regulate at least five 

contaminants from the CCL 3 in FY 2012. 

• EPA has been developing revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule. Input has been sought through expert panels, 

public workshops, an Agency work group, and other 

stakeholder meetings, as well as from peer reviewed 

scientific literature. In FY 2012, the Agency will continue 

to evaluate the long-term issues identified in the national 

review of the revised Lead and Copper Rule. 

• In FY 2011, the Agency developed and expects to publish 

the final regulatory determination for perchlorate. If the 

Agency decides to regulate perchlorate, we will begin the 

regulatory process to develop a drinking water standard 

for perchlorate in FY 2012. 

• In 2010, the Agency announced a new Drinking Water 

Strategy (DWS) that outlines new principles to improve 

the public health protection for drinking water. In FY 

2011, OW made significant progress for the first principle (i.e., addressing contaminants as groups rather than 

one at a time) by holding a national conversation with 

the public and stakeholders, including utilities, rural 

communities, and states. We expect to develop a regulatory action to address the first contaminant group in FY 

2012. OW will continue to collaborate with ORD and 

our regional, state, local, and other stakeholders in FY 

2012 to address the second principle, which is fostering 

the development of new drinking water technologies to 

address health risks posed by a broad array of contaminants. OW worked with other EPA Offices such as OCSPP 

in FY 2011 and will continue to do so in FY 2012 to 

gather additional information on other groups of contaminants and use other statutory authorities to protect 

drinking water (i.e., the third DWS principle). 

• In 2010, the Agency announced plans to revise the regulations for trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE). The Agency began to revise these two regulations in FY 2011 and will be working with an Agency 

workgroup to develop a proposed regulation in FY 2012. 

The Agency’s efforts to revise TCE and PCE might also 

consider other carcinogenic volatile organic compounds 

for regulation revision. 

• EPA will continue to collaborate with stakeholders to 

undertake the highest priority research and information 

collection activities to better understand water quality 

issues in distribution systems. 

2.	Implementation of Drinking Water Standards and 

Technical Assistance 

In order to facilitate compliance with drinking water regulations, EPA will use the following tools in partnership with 

states and tribes: 

•		 Sanitary Surveys: Sanitary surveys are on-site reviews 

of the water sources, facilities, equipment, operation, and 

maintenance of public water systems. As a result, these 

surveys can serve as a basis for an assessment of the 

operator’s water system management capability. States 

and tribes conduct sanitary surveys for community water 

systems once every three years. For non-community 

water systems or community water systems determined 

by the state or tribe to have outstanding performance 

based on prior surveys, surveys may be conducted every 

five years. EPA will conduct surveys at systems on tribal 

lands. Focused monitoring of this activity was initiated 

in 2007, for the three-year period starting in 2004 (see 

Program Activity Measure SDW-1). This measure applies 

to surface water systems and ground water systems under 

direct influence of surface water and ground water systems. Beginning in December 2009, states were required 

for the first time to conduct sanitary surveys for ground 

water systems. States have until December 2012 to complete the initial round of sanitary surveys for community 

water systems, and until December 2014 to complete 

the initial round of sanitary surveys for non-community 

water systems or community water systems designated as 

outstanding performers. 

•		 Technical Assistance and Training: Reference materials to support implementation of recent regulations will 

be developed or updated. These materials will include 

technical guidance, implementation guidance, and quick 

reference guides. Assistance will focus particularly on the 

Ground Water Rule, revised Lead and Copper Rule, and 

the Disinfection By-Products rules, as well as simultaneous compliance issues. EPA will promote operation and 

maintenance best practices to small systems in support of 

long-term compliance success with existing regulations. 

EPA will also provide training and technical assistance to 

states and to water systems that need to increase their 

treatment to comply with Stage 2 and LT2. Over 59,000 

water systems will need to comply with these rules 

beginning in 2011. EPA will continue to provide technical 

training to help state staff review new treatment plant 

upgrades under LT2, specifically membrane and ultraviolet disinfection. In addition, EPA will develop technical 

assistance materials and training to support state and 

water system implementation of the revised Total Coliform Rule. 

National Water Program Guidance 7	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

•		 Small System Assistance: EPA also will continue to provide technical assistance, as well as leverage partnerships 

to help systems serving fewer than 10,000 people consistently meet regulatory requirements through the use 

of cost-effective treatment technologies, proper disposal 

of treatment residuals, and compliance with monitoring 

requirements under the arsenic and radionuclide rules, 

and with rules controlling microbial pathogens and disinfection by-products in drinking water. Small public water 

systems face many challenges in providing safe drinking 

water and meeting the requirements of SDWA. These 

challenges include: (1) lack of adequate revenue or access 

to financing; (2) aging infrastructure; (3) retirement of 

experienced system operators and the inability to recruit 

new operators to replace them; (4) operators who lack 

the requisite financial, technical, or managerial skills; and 

(5) difficulty in understanding existing or new regulatory 

requirements. As a result, small systems may experience 

frequent or long-term compliance challenges to providing 

safe water to their communities. 

In response to this ongoing challenge, in FY 2012, EPA 

is continuing its efforts begun in FY 2010 to renew 

and reinforce efforts to enhance small system capacity 

through a comprehensive small system strategy founded 

on three major components. First, EPA is working with 

the USDA Rural Utilities Service and state DWSRF 

programs to strengthen financial support mechanisms. 

Through this component, the Agency will continue to 

encourage states that have not yet developed a disadvantaged communities program to do so, as well as advocating that states support existing disadvantaged community assistance, with an emphasis on those systems 

requiring installation of treatment technology to comply 

with the newer drinking water regulations. The Agency 

also will work closely with states to ensure that DWSRF 

loans are reserved for systems which are deemed sustainable or are on a pathway to sustainability through DWSRF 

support. Second, the Agency will work with states to 

improve training and technical assistance for small systems, and enhance state capacity development programs, 

in order to improve small system capacity to achieve and 

maintain compliance with drinking water regulations 

and long-term system sustainability. Through their first 

decade of experience, state capacity development programs have identified which strategies and techniques are 

most likely to help small systems achieve and maintain 

sustainability. Under this aspect of the strategy, EPA 

will continue to work with states to identify and disseminate best practices, policies and innovations across 

state programs, and promote cost-effective, energy- and 

water-efficient system practices. EPA also will encourage 

states to target use of DWSRF set-asides for activities 

that enhance the technical, managerial, and financial 

capacity of small systems; thereby enhancing the ability 

of these systems to consistently meet both existing and 

newer drinking water standards. Third, EPA will promote 

water system partnerships to address existing non-sustainable systems, and work with states to ensure that new 

water systems are sustainable. To promote restructuring 

and other forms of system partnerships such as voluntary consolidation, the Agency will continue to provide 

information on the benefits and best practices associated 

with these partnerships. In addition EPA, in cooperation 

with states and water system associations, will help states 

and systems identify how to use DWSRF set-asides to 

achieve desired partnerships. Also, the Agency will evaluate whether, as a condition of the DWSRF, state programs 

are effectively ensuring that new water systems have 

adequate capacity to meet SDWA requirements. 

To support implementation of this small system strategy, 

the Agency has developed a suite of new indicators for 

the FY 2011 Guidance, with continued emphasis for use in 

FY 2012. These indicators correspond to the three major 

components of the small system strategy: existing and 

new small water system inventory; state DWSRF projects 

targeting small systems; and small system noncompliance 

and their capacity to quickly return to compliance with 

health-based standards. For public water systems serving 

fewer than 500 persons, the Agency includes an indicator 

that will be able to track these systems, as well as the creation of new small water systems. This measure is important to help account for changes in the universe of small 

water systems and help provide a more complete picture 

of the nature of the small system challenges in each state. 

The measure is an important aspect of the small systems 

strategy that will continue to be a major area of emphasis 

in FY 2012. Schools and childcare centers are a critical 

subset of small systems for which EPA is also continuing 

to provide special emphasis in FY 2012 to ensure that 

children receive water that is safe to drink. Therefore, 

included is a separate indicator for schools and childcare 

centers meeting health-based standards. 

•		 Area-Wide Optimization Program: EPA’s Area-Wide 

Optimization Program (AWOP), which provides compliance assistance to small drinking water systems, continues to work with systems and states to develop and 

implement a variety of approaches to improve water 

system performance. Tools include comprehensive performance evaluations (CPEs) to assess the performance 

of filtration technology and distribution system optimization (DSO) techniques. AWOP is a highly successful 

technical assistance and training program that enhances 

the ability of small systems to meet existing and future 

microbial, disinfectant, and disinfection byproducts 

standards. In FY 2012, EPA continues to work with four 

EPA regional offices and 21 states to facilitate the transfer 

of specific skills using the performance-based training 

approach targeted towards optimizing key distribution 

system components and/or ground water system and 

distribution system integrity. 

National Water Program Guidance 8	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

•		 Drinking Water Laboratory Certification Program: 

EPA will continue the program that sets standards and 

establishes methods for EPA, state, tribal, and privatelyowned laboratories that analyze drinking water samples. 

Through this program, EPA also will conduct three EPA 

regional program reviews during FY 2012. Headquarters 

visits each EPA regional office on a triennial basis and 

evaluates their oversight of the state laboratories and 

the state laboratory certification programs within their 

purview. 

•		Data Access, Quality and Reliability: The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) serves as the 

primary source of national information on compliance 

with all health-based regulatory requirements of SDWA. 

As part of the Drinking Water Strategy and the Agencywide “Regaining Ground: Increasing Compliance in 

Critical Areas”, EPA will replace obsolete and expensive 

to maintain drinking water information system technology under the legacy SDWIS platform. The next generation of SDWIS will 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 states and EPA. In addition, EPA in concert 

with states, will work to collect and display all compliance 

monitoring data. This will improve transparency and data 

management operations. 

EPA will continue to work with states to improve data 

completeness, accuracy, timeliness, and consistency in 

the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) 

through: 1) training on data entry, error correction, and 

regulatory reporting; 2) conducting data verifications 

and analyses where possible; and 3) implementing quality 

assurance and quality control procedures. 

As stated previously, a new Drinking Water Strategy 

envisions a comprehensive new approach to public health 

protection under the SDWA and other federal statutes. 

The fourth principle of the Strategy calls for EPA to partner with states and tribes to share all monitoring data 

collected and reported by public water systems (PWS). 

This partnership will improve how states, tribes, and EPA 

share and use information, and allow more rigorous oversight of the drinking water program to improve public 

health. It will also improve consumer access to water quality data of their own systems. Making these data available 

will result in greater transparency in drinking water quality from the national level to the individual water-system 

level, thereby increasing public awareness of status and 

trends in drinking water quality and its importance 

to public health. Through this data sharing principle, 

the Strategy acknowledges the growing demand from 

environmental agencies, public health agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and the public for access 

to a broader range of information about drinking water 

quality than is currently available in the SDWIS database. 

EPA joined with three state environmental and public 

health associations in November 2010 in a memorandum 

of understanding for the exchange of drinking water data 

and information. Beginning in FY 2011 and continuing 

into FY 2012, EPA will work with state partners on the 

data to be shared, approaches to successful data exchange, 

uses of monitoring data, and ways to effectively communicate the data. 

•		 Coordination with Enforcement: The EPA regional 

offices and the Office of Water will continue to work with 

the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

(OECA) to identify instances of actual or expected noncompliance that pose risks to public health and to take 

appropriate actions as necessary. The Office of Water has 

worked with OECA to develop a new approach to significant noncompliance. The Office of Water believes that 

this new approach will better focus enforcement efforts 

on the greatest public health risks. In addition, OW and 

OECA will continue close coordination regarding violations at schools and childcare centers that have their own 

water source. These public water systems are of special 

concern as children are the subpopulation most vulnerable to lead and other contaminants, and as a result, a new 

measure was added in FY 2011 to monitor compliance. 

3.	Drinking Water State Revolving Fund 

The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), established under the Safe Drinking Water Act, enables states to 

offer low interest loans and other assistance to help public 

water systems across the nation make improvements and 

upgrades to their water infrastructure, or other activities 

that build system capacity. 

EPA will work with states to increase the DWSRF fund utilization rate2

 for projects from a 2002 level of 73% to 89% in 

2012 (see Program Activity Measure SDW-4). EPA will also 

work with states to monitor the number of projects that 

have initiated operations (see Program Activity Measure 

SDW-5). 

For fiscal years 2010-2013, appropriated funds will be allocated to states in accordance with each state’s proportion 

of total drinking water infrastructure need as determined 

by the most recent Needs Survey and Assessment.3 There is 

also a statutory requirement that each state and the District 

of Columbia receive no less than one percent of the allotment. The survey documents 20-year capital investment 

needs of public water systems that are eligible to receive 

DWSRF monies—approximately 53,000 community water 

systems and 21,400 not-for-profit non-community water 

systems. The survey reports infrastructure needs that are 

2 Fund Utilization Rate is the cumulative dollar amount of loan agreements divided by cumulative funds available. 

3 The 2007 Needs Survey was released in 2009 

National Water Program Guidance 9	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

required to protect public health, such as projects to ensure 

compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). 

In FY 2012 EPA will continue implementation of the SRF 

Sustainability Policy. This policy is designed to promote 

technical, financial, and managerial capacity as a critical 

means to meet infrastructure needs, and further enhance 

program performance and efficiency, and to ensure compliance. The Agency will continue to work with state and local 

governments to address federal drinking water policy in 

order to provide equitable consideration of small system 

customers. 

In FY 2012, EPA will further contribute to the sustainable 

water infrastructure initiative through partnership-building 

activities, including the Agency’s capacity development and 

operator certification work with states, and efforts with 

the water utility industry to promote asset management, 

system-wide planning, and the water sector as a career of 

choice. The program will engage states and other stakeholders to facilitate the voluntary adoption by public water 

systems of attributes associated with effectively managed 

utilities. Finally, the program also will continue to expand 

efforts to encourage sustainable practices at public water 

systems aimed at reducing water loss and better understanding linkages between water production/distribution 

and energy use. 

4.	Water System Security 

EPA will provide tools, training, and technical assistance to 

help protect the nation’s critical water infrastructure from 

terrorist and other catastrophic events. Reducing risk in the 

water sector requires a multi-step approach of determining risk through vulnerability assessments, reducing risk 

through security enhancements, and preparing to effectively respond to and recover from incidents. 

EPA will move to the next phase of the Water Security 

Initiative (WSI) pilot program, focusing on technical assistance, support and evaluation activities, and will continue 

to support water sector-specific agency responsibilities, 

including the Water Alliance for Threat Reduction (WATR), 

to protect the nation’s critical water infrastructure. The 

Agency will continue to integrate the regional laboratory 

networks and the WSI pilot laboratories into a national, 

consistent program. All of these efforts support the Agency’s responsibilities and commitments under the National 

Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), as defined within 

the Water Sector Specific Plan, which includes, for example, 

specific milestones for work related to the WSI, the Water 

Laboratory Alliance, and metric development. 

In FY 2012, EPA will complete as part of a stakeholder 

workgroup, an evaluation of the effectiveness, sustainability, and practicality of the WSI contamination warning 

system pilot. The Agency will also continue to prepare and 

refine a series of guidance documents for water utilities on 

designing, deploying, and testing contamination warning 

systems based on lessons learned from the pilots. 

In FY 2010, EPA published a Water Laboratory Alliance 

(WLA) response plan providing the processes and procedures for coordinated laboratory response to water contamination incidents. In FY 2012, EPA will focus its efforts on 

conducting exercises within the framework of this national 

plan and work to expand the membership of the WLA with 

the intention of achieving nationwide coverage. In addition, EPA will continue to support the Regional laboratory 

networks by providing laboratories and utilities with access 

to supplemental analytical capability and capacity, improved 

preparedness for analytical support to an emergency situation, and coordinated and standardized data reporting 

systems and analytical methods. 

In FY 2012, EPA in partnership with states and tribes will 

also continue working to ensure that water sector utilities 

have tools and information (including those that support 

WATR) to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks, other intentional acts, and natural disasters. 

The following preventive and preparedness activities will be 

implemented for the water sector in collaboration with the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), states and tribes, 

and homeland security and water sector officials: 

• Continue to promote awareness and adoption of drinking 

water and wastewater protective programs throughout 

the nation to further Agency priorities and the interests, 

needs, and priorities of stakeholders. 

• Continue to chair the Water Government Coordination 

Council and coordinate with the Water Sector Coordinating Council. 

• Continue to develop and conduct exercises to prepare 

utilities, emergency responders, and decision-makers to 

evaluate and respond to physical, cyber, and contamination threats and events; 

• Disseminate tools and provide technical assistance to 

ensure that water and wastewater utilities and emergency 

responders react rapidly and effectively to intentional 

contamination and other incidents. This includes: information on high priority contaminants, incident command protocols, sampling and detection protocols and 

methods, and treatment options; 

• Provide an expanded set of tools (e.g., best security practices, incident command system and mutual aid training, contaminant databases, decontamination guidance) 

in order to keep the water sector current with evolving 

water security priorities; 

• 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; and 

• Continue to implement specific recommendations of the 

Water Decontamination Strategy as developed by EPA 

and water sector stakeholders (e.g., defining roles and 

responsibilities of local, state, and federal agencies during 

an event). 

National Water Program Guidance 10	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 

	 

 

 

 

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

5.	Protecting Sources of Drinking Water 

A core principle of source water protection is that, while 

each public water system is responsible for providing safe 

drinking water, no public water system should have to 

provide more drinking water treatment than that which is 

required to address naturally occurring pollutant concentrations. In furtherance of this principle, EPA will serve as 

an analytic resource and facilitator for states, interstates, 

tribes, and communities in consolidating and sharing information, developing strategies and coordinating across jurisdictions to protect and preserve drinking water resources 

and continue a multiple barrier approach to drinking water 

management that uses source water protection as the initial 

barrier to contamination. The cost to prevent source water 

contamination is usually less than the cost of source water 

remediation. Source water includes surface water, ground 

water, and the interchange between them. 

EPA’s goal is to increase the number of community water 

systems with minimized risk to public health through development and implementation of protection strategies for 

source water areas (as determined by states) from a baseline of 20% of all areas in FY 2005 to 50% in FY 2012 (see 

measure SDW-SP4a). EPA also has a goal of increasing the 

percent of the population served by these community water 

systems to 57% in FY 2012 (see measure SDW-SP4b). 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue supporting state and local 

efforts to identify and address current and potential sources 

of drinking water contamination. These efforts are integral 

to the sustainable water infrastructure effort because source 

water protection can reduce the need for drinking water 

treatment, along with related increased energy use, which, 

in turn, can reduce the cost of infrastructure. In FY 2012, 

the Agency will continue to: 

• Work with national, state, and local stakeholder organizations and the multi-partner Source Water Collaborative to 

encourage broad-based actions at the state and local level 

to address potential sources of contamination (PSOCs); 

• Support source water protection efforts by providing 

training, technical assistance, and technology transfer 

capabilities to states and localities, and facilitating the 

adoption and sharing of Geographic Information System 

(GIS) databases to support local decision-making; 

• Work with states, interstates, tribes, and other stakeholders to characterize current and future pressures on source 

water quality and availability (particularly the impacts of 

climate change, such as the increased frequency, severity and duration of drought), assess adaptation options 

to address those impacts, and explore opportunities to 

mutually leverage resources among federal, state, interstate, and local agencies to implement the most effective 

options. 

EPA will continue working with federal programs to align 

source water conservation and protection with their priorities. In particular, EPA is working to integrate source water 

protection into Clean Water Act programs, such as the 

watershed approach, storm water management, and OECA 

enforcement programs (e.g. to prioritize inspections and 

enforcement by source water impact). 

EPA will continue working with other federal agencies like 

the U.S. Forest Service to maintain healthy land cover and 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture on land conservation 

programs and best management practices to protect water 

quality. EPA encourages states and communities to leverage these programs to preserve and protect drinking water 

supplies. 

6.	Underground Injection Control (UIC) 

EPA works with states and tribes to monitor and regulate 

the underground injection of fluids by wells, both hazardous and non-hazardous, to prevent contamination of 

underground sources of drinking water (USDWs). EPA, 

states, and tribes will continue to report on Classes I, II, 

and III wells that lost mechanical integrity and are returned 

to compliance within 180 days, but will no longer track 

these separately for each class starting in FY 2012. This 

will enable better target setting and evaluation of program 

performance. 

In 2012, states and EPA (where EPA directly implements the 

UIC program) will continue to carry out implementation of 

the regulations for each class of injection wells. States and 

EPA will continue to address high priority Class V wells. In 

2012, the measure for Class V will be changed from high 

priority wells, as defined by each program, to only those 

high priority well types regulated under the Class V rule in 

order to provide nationally consistent information about 

implementation of that rule. States and EPA will also continue to process UIC Class V permit applications for experimental technology carbon sequestration projects, as well 

as UIC permits for other non-traditional injection streams, 

such as desalination brines and treated waters injected for 

aquifer storage and recovery at a later time. The information gathered from these efforts will enable the Agency 

and states to evaluate new Class VI permits for large-scale 

commercial carbon sequestration applications following the 

GS regulation, finalized in December 2010. In FY 2012, EPA 

will have two indicator measures, permit actions taken and 

volume of CO2

 sequestered, that will assist in evaluating 

implementation of that rule. States and EPA will process 

UIC permits for other nontraditional injection streams, 

such as desalination brines and treated waters injected for 

aquifer storage and recovered at a later time. States and EPA 

will also examine and improve current practices for permitting the use of diesel fuels in hydraulic fracturing operations 

related to oil, gas, and geothermal production activities. 

The Agency will carry out the following responsibilities in 

permitting current and future geologic sequestration (GS) 

of carbon dioxide projects. Activities planned for FY 2012 

include: 

National Water Program Guidance 11	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

Underground Injection Control (UIC) Grant Guidance to States and Tribes 

The UIC Program, under the Safe Drinking Water Act, is vital to the protection of underground sources of drinking water. EPA works 

with states and tribes to regulate and monitor the injection of fluids, both hazardous and non-hazardous, by wells, to prevent contamination. This National Water Program Guidance for FY 2012 includes guidance for EPA regional, state, and tribal recipients of UIC program 

funds. Each year, State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) funds are distributed by the national UIC Program to help UIC programs 

enforce the minimum federal UIC requirements. These funds are authorized by Congress under Section 1443 of the SDWA. Grant 

recipients are expected to conduct their programs to help achieve the goals, objectives, sub-objectives, strategic targets, and program 

activity measures specified in this Guidance. In addition, grant resources should be focused on ensuring that the gains of the previous 

years’ efforts are preserved and built upon. 

The overall objective of the UIC grant is to protect public health by: 

•	 Setting minimum requirements for injection wells. All injection must be authorized under either general rules or specific permits; 

•	 Ensuring that injection well owners and operators may not site, construct, operate, maintain, convert, plug, abandon, or conduct 

any other injection activity that endangers USDWs; 

•	 Ensure that injected fluids stay within the well and the intended injection zone; or 

•	 No injection may occur which allows for the introduction of any contaminant into an underground source of drinking water 

(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 2012 priority activities for the UIC grant fund recipients 

should include the following: 

•	 Timely submission of primacy program revisions for the purpose of adopting new or revised federal regulations; 

•	 Maintaining program capacity to implement UIC program requirements for all classes of wells; 

•	 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. 

In accordance with EPA Order 5700.6A2, Policy on Compliance, Review and Monitoring, effective January 1, 2008, EPA regions must 

develop and carry out a post-award monitoring plan and conduct baseline monitoring for every award. This monitoring should 

ensure satisfaction of five core areas: (1) compliance with all programmatic terms and conditions; (2) correlation of the recipient’s 

work plan/application and actual progress under the award; (3) availability of funds to complete the project, (4) proper management of and accounting for equipment purchased under the award, and (5) compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements of the program. 

The grant allotments are determined by the UIC Grant Allocation Model and follow the criteria identified in Section 1443 of the 

SDWA 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 Model including how the model works and examples of how the UIC funds may be used. See http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/guidance.html. 

The UIC program is currently working to update the UIC Grant Allocation Model so that allocations best represent the resources and 

efforts required to implement primacy programs now and in the future. As with the old formula, the new formula will direct available 

resources toward the highest risk wells in order to achieve the maximum level of public health protection. Corresponding UIC grant 

guidance for the new formula will be issued in FY 2012. 

National Water Program Guidance 12 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe to Drink 

• Complete development of supporting GS documents (i.e., 

technical support documents, guidance documents, and 

implementation materials) for the GS of carbon dioxide 

recovered from emissions of power plants and other 

facilities; 

• Continue to facilitate research in UIC-related areas of geologic sequestration including studies on siting characteristics of GS projects, monitoring of injected CO2

, modeling of CO2

 plume and pressure front movement, and 

other processes of CO2 injection which could potentially 

pose risks to USDWs. 

• Analyze data collected through Class II Enhanced Oil 

Recovery (EOR) and Class V pilot projects and additional 

industry efforts to demonstrate, commercialize, and 

implement geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide 

technology; 

• Continue to engage states, tribes, nongovernmental 

organizations, and public stakeholders through meetings, 

workshops, and other avenues, on technical issues related 

to the final Class VI rule and on climate change issues 

more broadly; and 

• Provide necessary technical assistance, such as the issuance of technical guidance concerning well construction, 

financial responsibility, testing and monitoring, to states 

and tribes in permitting initial GS projects; and where 

EPA has direct implementation authority, permit GS 

projects; and 

• Process initial primacy applications from states and 

tribes seeking GS well permitting authority and approve 

revisions to UIC programs for acquiring GS Class VI wells 

in their existing state and tribal UIC programs. 

Many of these activities support the recommendations 

laid out in the President’s Carbon Capture and Storage 

Task Force report. EPA will continue to implement actions 

responsive to the Task Force report into FY 2012. Also in 

FY 2012, EPA will continue to review new applications for 

primary enforcement authority from states and tribes work 

to dissuade states from returning their UIC programs to the 

Agency, and update the UIC grant allocation guidance used 

by states and EPA regions. 

EPA will continue implementation of the UIC National 

Database by working with states and direct implementation 

programs to fully populate the UIC National Database. The 

Agency aims to include 68 UIC programs and 500,000 wells 

by 2013. EPA will support mapping of each state’s data for 

initial submissions and transition from paper reporting to 

electronic reporting for states that pass Quality Assurance/ 

Quality Control parameters. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

EPA has several program grants to the states, authorized 

under the Safe Drinking Water Act, that support work 

towards the drinking water strategic goals including the 

Public Water System Supervision (PWSS), Drinking Water 

State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), and Underground Injection Control (UIC) grants. For additional information on 

these grants, see the grant program guidance on the website 

(http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan). 

The PWSS grants support the states’ and EPA regional 

primacy activities (e.g., enforcement and compliance with 

drinking water regulations). PWSS grant guidance issued 

for FY 2005 will continue to apply in FY 2012. The Final FY 

2008 Memo, titled Guidance and Tentative Grant Allotments 

to Support Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Program 

on Tribal Lands, will continue to apply in FY 2012 to EPA 

regions that receive tribal PWSS funding to support the 

Tribal Drinking Water Program. Of the FY 2012 President’s 

Budget request of $109.7 million, approximately $6.8 million will support implementation of the Tribal Drinking 

Water Programs. 

The DWSRF program provides significant resources for 

states to use in protecting public health. Through FY 2009, 

the program as a whole provided over $16.1 billion ($16.2B 

including ARRA) in assistance and states reserved over 

$1.5 billion in set-asides to support key drinking water 

programs. In FY 2012, the Agency requested $0.99 billion 

for the program. EPA is emphasizing targeting DWSRF 

resources to achieve water system compliance with healthbased requirements. 

Tribal drinking water systems and Alaska Native Village 

water systems face the challenge of improving access to safe 

drinking water for the populations they serve. Funding for 

development of infrastructure to address public health goals 

related to access to safe drinking water comes from several 

sources within EPA and from other federal agencies. EPA 

reserves 2.0% of the DWSRF funds for grants for Tribal and 

Alaska Native Village drinking water infrastructure to provide access to safe drinking water by facilitating compliance 

with the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. EPA 

also administers a grant program for drinking water and 

wastewater projects in Alaska Native Villages. Additional 

funding is available from other federal agencies, including 

the Indian Health Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 

and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 

The FY 2012 budget requests $11.1 million for grants to 

states to carry out primary enforcement (primacy) responsibilities for implementing regulations associated with 

Classes I, II, III, IV, and V underground injection control 

wells. In addition, emphasis is directed to activities that 

address shallow wells (Class V) in source water protection 

areas. 

National Water Program Guidance 13	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 		

	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 

Strategies to Protect Public Health �	 Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat 

2. Fish and Shellfish Safe to Eat 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Percent of women of childbearing age 

having mercury levels in blood above 

the level of concern (of 4.6 percent). 

2005 Baseline: 5.7%	 2011 Commitment: 4.9% 

2012 Target: 4.9%	 2015 Target: 4.6% 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key National Strategies 

Elevated blood mercury levels pose a significant health risk 

and consumption of mercury- contaminated fish is the 

primary source of mercury in blood. Across the country as 

of 2008, states and tribes have issued fish consumption 

advisories for a range of contaminants covering 1.4 million 

river miles and over 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 risks in order to help people make more 

informed choices about selecting fish to eat. 

1.		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. 

In early March 2007, EPA established guidelines allowing 

states the option of developing comprehensive mercury 

reduction programs in conjunction with their lists of 

impaired waters developed under Section 303(d) of the 

Clean Water Act. Under the new guidelines, EPA allows 

states that have a comprehensive mercury reduction program to place waters impaired by mercury in a subcategory 

“5m” of their impaired waters lists and defer development of mercury TMDLs for these waters. These mercury 

impaired waters would not be included in estimates of the 

“pace” of TMDL development needed to meet the goal of 

developing TMDLs for impaired waters within 8 to 13 years 

of listing the waterbody. 

The key elements of a state comprehensive mercury reduction program are: 

• Identification of air sources of mercury in the state, 

including adoption of appropriate state level programs to 

address in-state sources; 

• Identification of other potential multi-media sources of 

mercury in products and wastes and adoption of appropriate state level programs; 

• Adoption of statewide mercury reduction goals and targets, including targets for percent reduction and dates of 

achievement; 

• Multi-media mercury monitoring; 

• Public documentation of the state’s mercury reduction 

program in conjunction with the state’s Section 303(d) 

list; and 

• Coordination across states where possible, such as 

through the use of multi-state mercury reduction 

programs. 

EPA expects that these elements of a comprehensive mercury reduction program will be in place in order for 5m listings to be appropriate (i.e., specific legislation, regulations, 

or other programs that implement the required elements 

have been formally adopted by the state, as opposed to 

being in the planning or implementation stages). States will 

have the option of using the “5m” listing approach as part 

of the Section 303(d) lists due to EPA in April of every even 

numbered year. 

EPA will also use available tools to identify specific waters 

with high mercury levels and then address these problems 

using core Clean Water Act program authorities, including 

TMDL and permitting programs where a state does not 

develop a comprehensive statewide reduction strategy for 

specific waters in which a local source of mercury can be 

addressed using existing tools. 

2.		Reduce Air Deposition of Mercury 

Most fish advisories are for mercury, and a critical element 

of the strategy to reduce mercury in fish is reducing emissions of mercury from combustion sources in the United 

States. 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). 

3.		Improve the Quality of Fishing Waters 

Success in achieving improved quality in shellfishing waters 

relies on implementation of Clean Water Act programs that 

are focused on sources causing shellfish acres to be closed. 

Important new technologies include pathogen source 

tracking, new indicators of pathogen contamination and 

predictive correlations between environmental stressors 

and their effects. Once critical areas and sources are identified, expanded monitoring and development of TMDLs 

National Water Program Guidance 14	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 		 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	 	

	 	 	 		

	 	

	 	 	 	 		

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Public Health �	 Water Safe for Swimming 

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. 

EPA is actively monitoring the development of fish consumption advisories and working with states to improve 

monitoring to support this effort. Forty-three percent of 

lake acres and 39 percent of river miles have been assessed 

to support waterbody-specific or regional consumption 

advisories or a determination that no consumption advice 

is necessary (see Program Activity Measure FS-1). 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. 

In addition, a wide range of clean water programs that 

applies throughout the country will generally reduce pathogen levels in key waters. For example, improved implementation of NPDES permit requirements for Combined Sewer 

Overflows, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, and 

storm water runoff, as well as improved nonpoint source 

control efforts, will contribute to restoration of shellfish 

uses. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Grant resources supporting this goal include the state 

program grants under Section 106 of the Clean Water 

Act, other water grants identified in the Grant Program 

Resources section of Subobjective 4, and grants from the 

Great Lakes National Program Office. For additional information on these grants, see the grant program guidance on 

the website (http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan). 

3. Water Safe for Swimming 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

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: 

2006 Baseline: 97%	 2011 Commitment: 91% 

2012 Target: 95% 2015 Target: 95% 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are included in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key National Strategies 

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 for primary contact recreation 

use or similar full body contact use by states, authorized 

tribes, and territories. 

For FY 2012, EPA’s national strategy for improving the 

safety of recreational waters will include four key elements: 

• Establish pathogen indicators based on sound science; 

• Identify unsafe recreational waters and begin restoration; 

• Reduce pathogen levels in all recreational waters; and 

• Improve beach monitoring and public notification. 

1.		Continue to Develop the Scientific Foundation to 

Support the Next Generation of Recommended 

Water Quality Criteria 

The BEACH Act requires EPA to develop new or revised recreational water quality criteria. EPA is implementing a science plan that will provide the support needed to underpin 

the next generation of recommended water quality criteria. 

EPA will propose criteria in early 2012 and publish new or 

revised criteria in October 2012. 

2.		Identify Unsafe Recreational Waters 

and Begin Restoration 

A key component of the strategy to restore waters unsafe 

for swimming is to identify the specific waters that are 

unsafe and develop plans to accomplish the needed restoration. A key part of this work is to maintain strong progress 

toward implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads 

(TMDLs) which are developed based on the schedules 

established by states in conjunction with EPA. Program 

Activity Measure WQ-8 indicates that most EPA regions 

expect to maintain schedules providing for completion of 

TMDLs within 13 years of listing. EPA will continue to work 

with states to expand implementation of TMDLs, including 

developing TMDLs on a water segment or watershed basis 

where appropriate (see Section II.1). 

In a related effort, the Office of Water will work in partnership with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (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. 

3.		Reduce Pathogen Levels in Recreational 

Waters Generally 

In addition to focusing on waters that are unsafe for swimming today, EPA, states and tribes will work in FY 2012 to 

reduce the overall level of pathogens discharged to recreational waters using three key approaches: 

• Reduce pollution from Combined Sewer Overflows 

(CSOs) that are not in compliance with final requirements 

of the Long Term Control Plans; 

National Water Program Guidance 15
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 

	 

 

Strategies to Protect Public Health Water Safe for Swimming 

• Address other sources discharging pathogens under the 

NPDES permit program; and Encourage improved management of septic systems. 

Overflows from combined storm and sanitary sewers in 

urban areas can result in high levels of pathogens being 

released during storm events. Because urban areas are often 

upstream of recreational waters, these overflows are a significant source of unsafe levels of pathogens. EPA is working 

with states and local governments to fully implement the 

CSO Policy providing for the development and implementation of Long Term Control Plans (LTCPs) for CSOs. EPA 

expects that close to 87% of the 853 CSO permits will have 

schedules in place to implement approved LTCPs in FY 2012 

(see Program Activity Measure SS-1). EPA will also work 

with states to resolve longstanding issues associated with 

sanitary sewer overflows and bypasses at treatment plants. 

Other key sources of pathogens to the nation’s waters are 

discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations 

(CAFOs), municipal storm sewer systems, and industrial 

facilities. EPA expects to work with states to assure that 

these facilities are covered by permits. In addition, EPA 

expects to work with the states to develop approaches for 

monitoring wet weather discharges and impacts to surface 

waters, developing WQBELs, and identifying effective control measures and BMPs. For CAFOs, the NPDES regulations currently require facilities with discharges to seek 

permit coverage. Full implementation of the NPDES permitting requirement for CAFOs will result in lower pathogen 

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. 

4.	 Improve 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. EPA continues to work with states to implement the 

Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health 

(BEACH) Act and expects that 97 percent of “significant” 

public beaches will be monitored in accordance with BEACH 

Act requirements in FY 2012 (see Program Activity Measure 

SS-2). Significant public beaches are those identified by 

states as “Tier 1” in their beach monitoring and notification 

programs. Finally, EPA will fully implement improvements 

to eBeaches that will make it easier for states to submit 

information on beach monitoring and notification, as well 

as enable EPA to make information available to the public 

through the BEACON system in a more timely manner 

(http://epa.gov/waterscience/beaches/). 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Grant resources supporting this goal include the Clean 

Water Act Section 106 grants to states, nonpoint source 

program implementation grants (Section 319 grants), and 

the BEACH Act grant program grants. For additional information on these grants, see the grant program guidance on 

the website (http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan). 

National Water Program Guidance 16	 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

 

 

 

	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 		

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	 	 		

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

III. Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal 

Waters, and Wetlands 

An overarching goal of the National Water Program is to protect and restore aquatic systems throughout the country, 

including rivers, lakes, coastal waters, and wetlands. Although the three subobjective strategies described below 

address discrete elements of the nation’s water resources, the National Water Program manages these efforts as part 

of a comprehensive effort. In addition, the national strategies described below are intended to work in concert with the 

efforts to restore and protect the large aquatic ecosystems described in Part IV of this Guidance. 

1. Improve Water Quality on a 

Watershed Basis 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Use pollution prevention and restoration approaches to protect and restore 

the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams 

on a watershed basis. 

(NOTE: Additional measures of progress are included in 

the Appendices, including measures related to watersheds 

and maintaining water quality in streams already meeting 

standards.) 

B) Key National Strategies 

In FY 2012, EPA will work with states, tribes, and others to 

implement programs to protect and restore water resources 

with three 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 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 including efforts to integrate these efforts with restoration approaches. 

1.		Implement Core Clean Water Programs to Protect All 

Waters Nationwide 

In FY 2012, EPA, states, and tribes need to continue to 

effectively implement and better integrate programs 

established under the Clean Water Act to protect, improve, 

and restore water quality. To achieve this, EPA will apply 

adaptive management principles to our core programs and 

initiatives. Key tasks for FY 2012 include: 

• Strengthen the water quality standards 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 nonpoint sources; and 

• Support sustainable wastewater infrastructure. 

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. 

In the event that the Office of Water finds that existing 

Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and 

Interstate Agencies: General Information 

This National Water Program Guidance for FY 2012 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 program activity measures specified in Section 

III.1 of this Guidance. In addition, Section III.1 includes specific 

guidance for State and Interstate grant recipients in text boxes 

like this. Together, Section III.1, the text boxes, and Appendix D 

replace the biannual Section 106 Grant Guidance. The National 

Water Program Guidance for FY 2012 continues this practice 

of incorporating Section 106 grants guidance into the main 

National Program Guidance. 

This grant guidance covers only the core water pollution 

control activities listed above this box. EPA continues to provide 

separate guidance for the following water pollution control 

activities: 

•	 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. 

•	 Water pollution enforcement activities. 

See http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/index.htm. 

*Tribes found eligible under Section 518(e) of the Clean Water 

Act to be treated in the same manner as a state (TAS) to administer a water quality standards program are expected to follow 

the same guidance as states for these programs. 

National Water Program Guidance 17
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

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. 

Priorities for FY 2012 in each of these program areas are 

described below. 

a)	Strengthen Water Quality Standards Program: Water 

Quality Standards are the regulatory and scientific foundation of water quality protection programs under the 

Clean Water Act. Under the Act, states and authorized 

tribes establish water quality standards 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. 

To help achieve strategic targets, EPA will continue to 

review and approve or disapprove state and tribal water 

quality standards and promulgate replacement standards 

where needed; develop water quality criteria, information, methods, models, and policies to ensure that each 

waterbody in the United States has a clear, comprehensive suite of standards consistent with the Clean Water 

Act, 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 

territory adoption of numeric criteria for nitrogen and 

phosphorus pollution. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus 

can cause eutrophication and human health problems 

in lakes, estuaries, rivers, and streams; and can degrade 

drinking water quality. EPA also encourages states to 

take action to reduce loadings of these pollutants, while 

they develop their numeric criteria. For example, a policy 

memorandum issued in March 2011, “Working in Partnership with States to Address Phosphorus and Nitrogen 

Pollution through Use of a Framework for State Nutrient 

Reductions,” encourages states to develop watershed scale 

plans for targeting adoption of the most effective agricultural practices and other appropriate loading reduction 

measures in areas where they are most needed while they 

develop numeric nutrient criteria and related schedules. 

To track progress, EPA will work with states to identify 

internal milestones for developing, proposing, and adopting total nitrogen and total phosphorus numeric criteria 

for their waters (see Program Activity Measures WQ-1a, 

1b, and 1c). EPA continues to believe that it is also beneficial for states to derive additional numeric criteria for 

response variables, such as chlorophyll-a and water clarity. 

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 

Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and 

Interstate Agencies: Water Quality Standards 

It is EPA’s objective for states and authorized tribes to administer the water quality program consistent with the requirements 

of the CWA and the water quality standards regulation.* EPA 

expects states and tribes will enhance the quality and timeliness of their water quality standards 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 water quality standards 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-3a and 3b). States with disapproved standards provisions should work with EPA to resolve 

the disapprovals promptly. 

EPA places a high priority on states proposing and adopting 

numeric water quality standards 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 (see measures WQ-1a and 1b). To help EPA track 

state progress, states need to provide EPA with a full set of 

performance milestone information concerning total nitrogen 

and total phosphorus numeric criteria development, proposal, 

and adoption (see measure WQ-1c). 

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 water quality standards 

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 for this purpose. EPA will provide a copy 

of the Database for a state or tribe to populate, operate, and 

maintain locally if it does not have its own database. You may 

request a copy of the WQSDB and guidance for its installation 

and use at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/ 

wqshome_index.cfm. 

*Tribes found eligible to be treated in the same manner as a 

state (TAS) to administer water quality standards programs 

under Section 518 of the Clean Water Act. As of January 2009, 

44 tribes have been found to be eligible for TAS status 

review of proposed activities that are likely to lower water 

quality in high quality waters to determine whether 

the proposed degradation is necessary to accommodate 

important economic or social development in the area in 

which the waters are located. EPA strongly encourages 

states and authorized tribes without antidegradation 

implementation procedures to establish them as soon 

as possible to ensure that antidegradation policies are 

implemented. 

National Water Program Guidance 18
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

In a related effort, EPA will continue 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 Act. The three 

approaches are: the non-regulatory approach; the tribal 

law water quality protection approach; and the EPAapproved water quality protection approach. EPA tracks 

the progress of tribes adopting EPA-approved water 

quality standards under the third approach (see Program 

Activity Measure WQ-2). 

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 

water quality standards up to date with the latest scientific information (see Program Activity Measures WQ-3a 

and 3b) and to facilitate adoption of standards that EPA 

can approve (see Program Activity Measures WQ-4a). 

EPA encourages states, territories, and authorized tribes 

to make their water quality standards accessible to the 

public on the Internet in a systematic format. 

b)	Improve Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment: 

EPA will continue to work with states, tribes, territories, 

and other partners to provide the monitoring 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. 

Congress designated $18.5 million in new Section 106 

funds for the Agency’s Monitoring Initiative. Begun 

in 2005, this initiative builds upon states’ base investments in monitoring to include enhancements to state 

and interstate monitoring programs and collaboration 

on statistically-valid surveys of the nation’s waters. EPA 

recognizes that these funds represent a small amount of 

the total needed to address all state water monitoring 

needs. The basis for allotting these funds is found in the 

Amendment to the Guidelines for the Award of Monitoring 

Initiative Funds under Section 106 Grants to States, Interstate Agencies, and Tribes in the Federal Register in July 

17, 2008 (http://www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/awardmonitoring-fund.htm). Once FY 2012 funds are appropriated, EPA will revise the guidelines to reflect any changes 

to the program. The guidelines specify the activities that 

states and interstate agencies carry out under the monitoring initiative. These included funding new, expanded, 

or enhanced monitoring activities as part of the state’s 

implementation of its comprehensive state monitoring 

strategy. Some monitoring priorities that states should 

consider include: 

• Integration of statistical survey and targeted monitoring designs to assess the condition of all water 

resources over time; 

• Evaluate the effects of implementation of TMDLs and 

watershed plans, 

• Development of criteria and standards for nutrients 

and excess sedimentation; 

• Enhancement of bioassessment and biocriteria for all 

water resources; and 

• Support other state monitoring objectives, including 

monitoring of wetlands and use of landscape and other 

predictive tools. 

A separate Section 106 workplan component must be 

submitted that includes water monitoring activities and 

milestones for both implementation of state strategies 

and collaboration on statistically valid surveys of the 

nation’s waters. (http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/ 

nationalsurveys.html) 

State and EPA cooperation on statistically valid assessments of water condition nationwide remains a top 

priority. In FY 2012, EPA will issue the National Rivers 

& Streams Assessment report which will contain the 

finding from the 2008-2010 rivers & streams survey 

coupled with a baseline condition of the nation’s rivers. This report will constitute the second survey for 

streams which will allow a comparison of stream conditions from 2004 to 2008/2009 and evaluate change. The 

fifth report on the national coastal condition also will 

be released in 2012. In FY 2012, EPA, states, and tribes 

will be conducting field sampling for the second National 

Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and 

Interstate Agencies: Monitoring 

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 EPA’s March, 

2003 guidance, “Elements of a State Water Monitoring and 

Assessment Program” (http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/ 

elements/ ), which calls for states to implement their monitoring strategies by 2014. During FY 2012, these efforts include: 

•	 Implementing monitoring strategies; 

•	 Undertaking statistical surveys; and 

• Integrating assessments of water conditions, including 

reports under Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act and 

listing of impaired waters under Section 303(d) of the Clean 

Water Act by April 1, 2012. 

In FY 2012, some states will transmit water quality data to the 

national STORET Warehouse using the Water Quality Exchange 

(WQX) framework and submit assessment results for the 2012 

Integrated Report via the Assessment Database version 2, or a 

compatible electronic format, and geo-reference these assessment decisions (see Program Activity Measure WQ-7). EPA will 

support states’ use of WQX, WQX Web, and data in the STORET 

Data Warehouse 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. 

National Water Program Guidance 19
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

Lakes Assessment, and data collected from the previous 

year’s Wetlands Survey will be undergoing laboratory 

analysis. FY 2010 CWA Section 106 Monitoring Initiative 

Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and 

Interstate Agencies: TMDLs 

funds will be allocated for sampling for the second Rivers & Streams Survey. Throughout the National Aquatic 

Resource Survey (NARS) program EPA will continue to 

enhance and expand its working relation with states, 

tribes, and other partners to improve the administration, 

logistical, and technical support for the surveys. 

In FY 2012, states will continue to enhance and refine 

their monitoring programs and make progress according 

to schedules established in their monitoring strategies 

(see Program Activity Measure WQ-5). EPA 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 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 Program Activity Measure WQ-6). As tribal 

strategies are developed, EPA will work with tribes to 

implement them over time. 

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. 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. 

c)	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 goals. 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, including the National 

Estuary Programs (see “Protect Coastal and Ocean 

Waters” Subobjective), as well as the Association of State 

and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators 

(ASIWPCA), and federal land management agencies foster 

efficient strategies to address water quality impairments. 

In 2007, EPA and the Forest Service (FS) signed a Memorandum of Agreement (http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/ 

usfsepamoa/) designed to develop strategies (e.g., TMDLs 

and TMDL alternatives) to address water quality impairments on FS land. In addition, EPA formed a partnership 

EPA encourages states to effectively assess their waters and 

make all necessary efforts to ensure the timely submittal of 

required § 303(d) lists of impaired waters. For the 2010 Integrated Reporting (IR) Cycle, State 303(d) list submissions did 

not match the progress made with the 2008 IR Cycle. In 2012, 

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 water quality 

standards are not attained, states will develop Total Maximum 

Daily Loads (TMDLs), critical tools for meeting water restoration goals. States should establish a schedule for developing 

necessary TMDLs as expeditiously as practicable. EPA policy is 

that TMDLs for each impairment listed on the state § 303(d) lists 

should be established in a time frame that is no longer than 8 

to 13 years from the time the impairment is identified. States 

have started to address more difficult TMDLs, such as broadscale mercury and nutrient TMDLs, which required 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). 

with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to identify the 

location of impaired waters and to develop a strategy to 

address and protect waters on FWS land. These networks 

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 percent 

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 Program 

Activity Measure WQ-8). 

As noted below, EPA is encouraging states to organize 

schedules for TMDLs to address all pollutants on an 

impaired segment when possible (see Program Activity 

Measure WQ-21a). Where multiple impaired segments 

are clustered within a watershed, EPA encourages states 

to organize restoration activities across the watershed 

(i.e., apply a watershed approach). To assist in the 

development of Watershed TMDLs, the TMDL program 

developed two tools: Handbook for Developing Watershed TMDLs, and a ‘checklist’ for developing mercury 

TMDLs where the source is primarily atmospheric deposition (http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/). Another tool 

supporting the development of watershed TMDLs is the 

Causal Analyses/Diagnosis Decision Information System 

(http://cfpub.epa.gov/caddis). 

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 

National Water Program Guidance 20 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	

	 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

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 

watershed approach, and innovative ideas for protecting 

these waters. Moreover, EPA issued an updated guidance 

on how to more effectively address stormwater impairments under two key programs of the CWA: the 303(d) 

TMDL Program and the NPDES Stormwater Program. 

The updated guidance will assist the translation of TMDL 

Waste Load Allocations into NPDES Stormwater permits, 

as well as support innovative approaches, such as Impervious Cover TMDLs, to address the considerable number 

of waterbodies polluted by stormwater discharges. 

d) 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 public-owned treatment works. 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 will be working 

closely with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance (OECA) to implement the Clean Water Act 

Action Plan. Additional information on the Action Plan 

and 2012 activities can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ 

ocfo/npmguidance/index.htm#OECA. Some key NPDES 

program efforts include: 

•		 Permit Quality Reviews and Action Items: EPA 

conducts Permit Quality Reviews to assess the health 

and integrity of the NPDES program in authorized 

states, tribes, territories, and EPA regions. EPA manages a commitment and tracking system to ensure 

that NPDES Action Items identified in these assessments are implemented. Implementation is measured 

through Program Activity Measure WQ-11. Additional 

NPDES Action Items will continue to be identified and 

addressed through this process in FY 2012. 

•		 Program Integrity: EPA will increase emphasis in 

working with states to ensure the integrity of the 

NPDES program. Consistent with the Clean Water Act 

Action Plan, EPA will integrate program and enforcement oversight to ensure the most significant actions 

affecting water quality are included in an accountability 

system and are addressed. Some factors that will be 

reviewed in EPA’s oversight program include sufficient 

progress in the implementation of the NPDES program 

including permitting, inspections, and enforcement. In 

addition, EPA will begin a 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. 

•		Integrated Workload Planning: The Office of Wastewater Management (OWM) and the Office of Compliance (OC) 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 Clean Water Act Action Plan and 

the “Coming Together for Clean Water” strategy. 

•		 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 (see Program Activity Measures 

WQ-19). Currently, measure WQ-19’s targets are based 

on a universe of priority permits that shifts each year, 

and those fluctuations in the measure’s universe make 

trend analysis difficult. In FY 2012, EPA intends to 

reevaluate the overall measure structure, as well as 

criteria used in the selection process for priority permits, in order to allow EPA to set a better baseline and 

improve the overall effectiveness of the measure. Any 

revisions to this measure are intended for adoption and 

implementation in FY 2013. 

•		 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 (see Program Activity Measure WQ-20). EPA 

will continue to coordinate with EPA regional offices, 

states, USDA, and other federal agencies to implement 

watershed programs. 

•		 Green Infrastructure: EPA is collaborating with 

partner organizations to implement the Green Infrastructure Action Strategy released in January 2008, to 

help incorporate green infrastructure solutions at the 

local level to protect water quality using integrated wet 

weather management. Green Infrastructure management approaches and technologies infiltrate, evapotranspire, capture and reuse stormwater to maintain or 

restore natural hydrology. EPA supports use of Section 

106 funds to provide programmatic support for green 

infrastructure efforts, which promote prevention, 

reduction, and elimination of water pollution. 

•		 Pesticides: 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 United States. In 

response to the Court’s decision, EPA issued a draft 

NPDES pesticides general permit (PGP) in 2010 and 

National Water Program Guidance 21	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

will issue a final PGP in 2011 for areas of the country 

where EPA is the NPDES permitting authority. EPA 

has been and will continue to assist NPDES-authorized states in developing their own pesticide general 

permits and to assist in a national effort to educate 

the pesticides application industry regarding the new 

permit requirements. 

•		 Vessels: As a result of a 2006 court ruling vacating a 

longstanding EPA regulation, approximately 70,000 

vessels that were exempt from permitting need to be 

covered by an NPDES permit for discharges incidental 

to their normal operation. In December 2008, EPA 

issued the Vessel General Permit (VGP) to provide 

coverage for these vessels in US waters. EPA is currently developing the next iteration of the VGP, which 

will become effective in December 2013. As part of 

these efforts, EPA has taken the lead in developing 

scientific protocols and models to determine how to 

more effectively control the introduction of numerous aquatic invasive species into our Nation’s waters 

from ballast water discharges. 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. Legislation enacted on July 31, 2008, (P.L. 

110-299) established a moratorium on NPDES permitting of incidental discharges (except ballast water) 

from fishing vessels (regardless of size) and commercial 

vessels less than 79 feet. Subsequent legislation (P.L. 

111-215) extended this moratorium to December 18, 

2013. EPA is exploring options for providing permit 

coverage for these vessels. 

•		 Stormwater: In October 2008, The National Academy 

of Sciences/National Research Council (NRC) found 

that EPA’s stormwater program needs significant 

changes to improve its effectiveness and the quality 

of urban streams. EPA has evaluated the NRC findings and state permitting authorities have identified 

additional efficiencies that should be considered. EPA 

has initiated national rule-making to improve the 

overall efficiency and effectiveness of the program. EPA 

intends to propose this rule in the fall of 2011 and take 

final action in November of 2012 (FY 2013). 

•		 CAFOs: EPA revised the NPDES regulations for 

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in 

2008 to address the Second Circuit’s 2005 decision in 

Waterkeeper Alliance et al. 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. EPA will also work 

with permitting authorities to identify which CAFOs 

need to seek permit coverage and provide the tools and 

information needed to prevent discharges and provide 

appropriate permit coverage. In addition, EPA will 

continue to monitor the number of CAFOs covered by 

NPDES permits as an indication of state progress (see 

Program Activity Measure WQ-13). 

•		 Chesapeake Bay: In response to the Chesapeake Bay 

Executive Order, EPA will conduct significant new regulatory, permitting, modeling, reporting and planning 

efforts for the Agency, including developing a stormwater regulation to better control wet weather related 

pollution and revised CAFO implementation guidance 

and regulations to better control agricultural pollution in the Chesapeake Bay. EPA will work with the Bay 

jurisdictions to facilitate implementation of the Bay 

TMDL at the local level. EPA will encourage jurisdictional NPDES programs to incorporate more stringent 

permit provisions in stormwater permits prior to 

promulgation of a rule. Also, EPA will review all new or 

reissued NPDES permits for significant municipal and 

industrial wastewater dischargers submitted by Bay 

jurisdictions to ensure that the permits are consistent 

with the applicable Bay water quality standards and the 

Bay TMDL wasteload allocations. EPA also will continue to support jurisdictions and EPA regional offices 

in effectively implementing the NPDES program to 

improve the health of the watershed. Finally, EPA will 

continue to implement a Chesapeake Bay Compliance 

and Enforcement Strategy in part to ensure that permittees are in compliance with their permit provisions. 

•		 Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) 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. 

•		 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 Program 

Activity Measure WQ-12). 

•		 Pretreatment: 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 Publicly Owned Treatment Works 

(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 Program Activity Measure 

WQ-14). 

•		 Compliance: 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 publicly owned 

treatment works (POTWs) that comply with their permitted wastewater discharge standards (see Program 

Activity Measures WQ-15 and WQ-16). As part of the 

Clean Water Act Action Plan, in FY 2011, EPA’s OECA 

National Water Program Guidance 22	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

Section 106 Grant Guidance to States and 

Interstate Agencies: Permits, Enforcement, 

and Compliance 

States should continue to implement significant actions identified during Regional program and permit quality reviews to 

assure effective management of the permit program and to 

adopt efficiencies to improve environmental results. States 

should also implement recommended significant actions identified under the EPA/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 and those permit revisions needed to implement TMDLs. 

EPA will track the implementation of the significant action 

items described above (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 the Clean Water Act 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 watershed 

permitting, trading, and linking development of water quality 

standards, TMDLs, and permits. States are expected to ensure 

that stormwater permits are reissued on a timely basis and to 

strengthen the provisions of the MS4 permits as the permits 

are reissued to ensure clarity on what is required and that 

permits are written so that they are enforceable. States should 

place emphasis on incorporating green infrastructure in all 

stormwater permits. States need to update their programs to 

implement the concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) 

rule, including regulations, permits and technical standards, 

and work closely with their inspection and enforcement 

programs to ensure a level playing field. States need to modify 

their programs to regulate pesticide discharges by April 2011 

and continue implementation through 2012. 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. States 

are expected to ensure data availability by fully populating 

the required Integrated Compliance Information System (ICISNPDES) or Permit Compliance System (PCS) Water Enforcement 

National Data Base (WENDB) data elements or data elements 

in ICIS-NPDES that are comparable to WENDB in PCS or ICIS 

(December 28, 2007 memo from Michael Stahl and James 

Hanlon, “ICIS Addendum to the Appendix of the 1985 Permit 

Compliance System Policy Statement”) as appropriate. The 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) has 

a separate National Program Manager (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 2012, OECA’s NPM Guidance continues to 

identify activities for improving enforcement efforts aimed at 

addressing water quality impairment through the Clean Water 

Act Action Plan (the Action Plan). OW and states will be working 

closely with OECA as the Action Plan is implemented. The final 

OECA NPM Guidance is available with the complete Agency set 

at: www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/index.htm. 

will be leading an effort to review, revise and integrate 

current policies and tools that guide how EPA and state 

prioritize permitting and enforcement actions, including those surrounding the SNC Policy, and in FY2012, 

regions and states should pilot test the draft revised 

versions of these policies and regulations. 

•		 Urban Waters: EPA’s Urban Waters effort is focusing on pilot projects nationwide to help urban communities, particularly disadvantaged communities, 

to reconnect with and revitalize their water environments. EPA’s OWM will continue to be involved in 

Federal Partners workgroup, develop work products to 

advance this effort to integrate green infrastructure 

into stormwater management plans, reduce combined 

sewer overflows, and promote wastewater operation 

certification training. 

e)	Implement Practices to Reduce Pollution From All 

Nonpoint Sources: Polluted runoff from sources such as 

agricultural lands, forestry sites, and urban areas is the 

largest single remaining cause of water pollution. Land 

applied nutrients represent a significant challenge to 

improving water quality. EPA, states, and tribes are working with local governments, watershed groups, property 

owners, and others to implement programs and management practices to control polluted runoff throughout the 

country. 

EPA provides grant funds to states and tribes under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act to implement comprehensive programs to control nonpoint pollution, including reduction in runoff of nitrogen, phosphorus, and 

sediment. EPA will monitor progress in reducing loadings 

of these key pollutants (see Program Activity Measure 

WQ-9). In addition, EPA estimates that more than half of 

the waters identified on states’ 303(d) impaired waters 

list are primarily impaired by nonpoint sources and will 

track progress in restoring these waters nationwide (see 

Program Activity Measure WQ-10). 

As described in more detail in Section 2 below, EPA is 

encouraging states to use the Section 319 program to 

support a more comprehensive, watershed approach to 

protecting and restoring water quality. EPA first published in FY 2003 new grant guidelines for the Section 

319 program to require the use of at least $100 million 

for developing and implementing comprehensive watershed plans. These plans are geared towards restoring 

impaired waters on a watershed basis while still protecting high quality and threatened waters as necessary. 

In FY 2012, 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. State CWSRF funds are also available to support efforts to control pollution from nonpoint sources. 

National Water Program Guidance 23	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	

	 	

	 

 

 

	 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

f)	Support Sustainable Water Infrastructure: The U.S. 

depends on drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater 

infrastructure for the health, the economy, the vitality of 

water environment, and the sustainability of communities. However, the U.S. has underinvested in the renewal 

of existing infrastructure while growth patterns create 

needs for an expanding network of infrastructure that 

communities will need to maintain and replace. 

The U.S. must embrace a fundamental change in the way 

we manage, value, and invest in infrastructure. EPA is 

pursuing a Sustainable Infrastructure Program, designed 

to affect that change by institutionalizing practices that 

will help communities find sustainable solutions while 

maximizing 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 foster the integration 

of water infrastructure decisions into smart growth 

strategies that provide more livable communities and 

reduce long term infrastructure needs and costs. EPA is 

also 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. 

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. 

EPA is also pursuing these goals through the DWSRFs 

and CWSRFs that provide low interest loans to help 

finance drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, as well as other water quality projects. Recognizing 

the substantial remaining need for drinking water and 

wastewater infrastructure, EPA expects to continue to 

provide significant annual capitalization to the SRFs, 

and to encourage the leveraging of those investments to 

achieve infrastructure and community sustainability. EPA 

will work with states to assure the effective operation of 

SRFs, including monitoring the fund utilization rate (see 

Program Activity Measure WQ-17). 

In another example, EPA is working with USDA and other 

partners to expand the promotion of effective utility 

management with smaller utilities. This effort will support the National Water Program’s efforts to address the 

needs of disadvantaged urban and rural communities. 

In a related effort, EPA will work with other federal agencies to improve access to basic sanitation. The 2002 World 

Summit in Johannesburg adopted the goal of reducing 

the number of people lacking access to safe drinking 

water and basic sanitation by 50% by 2015. EPA will contribute to this work through its support for development 

of sanitation facilities in Indian country, Alaskan Native 

villages, and Pacific Island communities using funds 

set aside from the CWSRF and targeted grants. Other 

federal agencies, such as the Department of the Interior 

(DOI), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 

also play key roles in this area and are working with EPA 

in this effort. EPA is also working to improve access to 

drinking water and wastewater treatment in the U.S.-

Mexico Border area (see Section IV of this Guidance). 

2.	 Accelerate Watershed Protection 

Strong implementation of core Clean Water Act programs is 

essential to improving water quality but is not sufficient to 

fully accomplish the water quality improvements called for 

in the Agency’s Strategic Plan. 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 these 

complex problems demands a watershed systems approach 

to protection that considers both habitats and the critical 

watershed processes that drive the condition of aquatic ecosystems. The watershed systems approach is implemented 

through an iterative planning process to actively seek broad 

public involvement and focus multi-stakeholder and multiprogram efforts within hydrologically-defined boundaries to 

address priority resource goals. 

The National Water Program has successfully used a 

watershed approach to focus core program activities and to 

promote and support accelerated efforts in key watersheds. 

At the largest hydrologic scales, EPA and its partners operate successful programs addressing the Chesapeake Bay, 

Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, and National Estuary Program 

watersheds. Many states, EPA regions, and their partners 

have also undertaken important efforts to protect, improve, 

and restore watersheds at other hydrologic scales. Together, 

these projects provide strong evidence of the value of a 

comprehensive approach to assessing water quality, defining problems, integrating management of diverse pollution 

controls, and defining financing of needed projects. 

Over the past decade, EPA has witnessed a groundswell of 

locally-driven watershed protection and restoration efforts. 

Watershed stakeholders, such as citizen groups, governments, non-profit organizations, and businesses, have come 

together and created long-term goals and innovative solutions to clean up their watersheds and promote more sustainable uses of their water resources. Additionally, many 

of these groups and other volunteer efforts provide water 

monitoring data that can be used to identify problems and 

track progress toward water quality goals. EPA estimates 

that there are approximately 6,000 local watershed groups 

active nationwide. 

National Water Program Guidance 24	 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

National Water Program Guidance 25 Fiscal Year 2012 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

To increase focus on protecting, maintaining, and conserving our nation’s remaining healthy waters, EPA has 

launched a proactive approach called the Healthy Watersheds Initiative (HWI) (http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/ 

watershed/index.cfm). The goal of the HWI is to maintain 

and protect a healthy watershed “infrastructure” of habitat, 

biotic communities, water chemistry, and intact watershed processes such as hydrology, fluvial geomorphology, 

and natural disturbance regimes. These healthy, functioning watersheds provide the ecological infrastructure that 

anchor water quality restoration efforts. This ecological 

support system will enable us to restore impaired waters, 

and to do so cost effectively. Key components of the HWI 

are development of Regional Office HWI Strategies that 

include working with the states to identify healthy watersheds and intact components of other watersheds statewide 

and implement protection and conservation programs both 

at the state and local levels. 

For FY 2012, EPA will finalize and implement its National 

Strategy, including a Healthy Watersheds Strategy, for 

building the capacity of state, tribal, and local government 

and watershed groups to protect and restore water quality. 

The Strategy emphasizes four activities to accelerate local 

watershed protection efforts: 

• Target training and tools to areas where existing groups 

can deliver environmental results; 

• Work with states to develop and begin implementation of 

Healthy Watersheds programs; 

• Enhance support to local watershed organizations 

through third party providers (e.g., federal partners, EPA 

assistance agreement recipients), including support for 

enhancing volunteer monitoring and EPA and state ability to use volunteer data; and 

• Share best watershed approach management practices in 

locations where EPA is not directly involved. 

EPA is also working at the national level to develop partnerships with federal agencies to encourage their participation 

in watershed protection and to promote delivery of their 

programs on a watershed basis. For example, EPA is working with other federal agencies (e.g., Forest Service, USGS, 

USFWS & others) to leverage their healthy watersheds 

programs (e.g., Green Infrastructure Community of Practice). Also, EPA will work with USDA to promote coordinated use of federal resources, including grants utilizing 

the Clean Water Act Section 319 and Farm Bill funds. EPA 

is also working with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to foster efficient strategies 

to address water quality impairments by maintaining and 

restoring watersheds on federal lands. EPA and the USFS 

will work to advance a suite of water quality related actions, 

TMDL alternatives (i.e., including category 4b watershed 

plans) that will build partnerships between agencies and 

among states. 

3.	 Define Waterbody/Watershed Standards Attainment 

Goals and Strategies 

In 2002, states identified some 39,503 specific waterbodies 

as impaired (i.e., not attaining state water quality standards) on lists required under Section 303(d) of the Clean 

Water Act. 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. 

Nationally, EPA has adopted a goal of having 3,360 of those 

waters identified as attaining water quality standards by 

2015 (about 8.2% of all impaired waters identified in 2002). 

Regions have indicated the progress they expect to make 

toward this goal in FY 2012 (see strategic target WQ-SP10. 

N11 and the following table). 

Targets for Attaining Standards in Impaired Waters By 

Region and Nationally (Measure WQ-SP10.N11) 

Region 

Total 

Impaired 

Waters 

(2002) 

FYs 2002-

2010 

Waters in 

Attainment 

FY 2011 

Commitment 

(cumulative) 

2012 Target 

(cumulative) 

1 6,710 101 117 133 

2 1,805 126 127 128 

3 8,998 544 555 575 

4 5,274 495 504 554 

5 4,550 630 640 660 

6 1,407 182 190 200 

7 2,036 295 302 308 

8 1,274 270 270 276 

9 1,041 72 72 102 

10 6,408 194 196 199 

Totals 39,5034 2,909 2,973 3,135* 

Note that a previous measure reported 1,980 waters identified as 

impaired in 1998-2000 to be in attainment by 2002. These estimates are not included in the table above. *Although the regional 

aggregate for WQ-SP-10.N11 is 3,135, EPA has set a national FY 

2012 target of 3,273. EPA will revisit the FY 2012 targets this 

summer to determine the most appropriate commitment for this 

measure. 

Regional commitments for this measure, to be developed 

over the summer of 2011 based on the targets in the table 

above, should reflect the best effort by EPA regions and 

states to address impaired waters based on redesigning 

and refocusing program priorities and delivery methods 

where necessary to meet or exceed this measure’s targets. 

In the event that an EPA regional office finds that existing program delivery and alignment is not likely to result 

in a significant contribution to national goals, the EPA 

4 39,503 updated from 39,768 to reflect corrected data. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

region should work with states to rethink and redesign the 

delivery of clean water programs to more effectively restore 

waterbodies and watersheds. Regions will also develop 

targets and commitments for progress under measures 

related to improvement of impaired waters short of full 

standards attainment (see measure WQ-SP11) and in small 

watersheds where one or more waterbody is impaired (see 

measures WQ-SP12.N11). 

States and EPA regions have indicated that the time frame 

for reaching full attainment in formerly impaired waters 

can be long and that the significant program efforts to put 

restoration plans in place need to be better recognized. 

Acknowledging this issue, EPA will work with states to 

report the number of impaired water segments where restoration planning will be complete in FY 2012 (see Program 

Activity Measure WQ-21a and proposed indicator measure 

in the Incremental Progress in Restoring Water Quality 

section below). Completion of planning is an essential, 

intermediate step toward full restoration of a waterbody 

and can be documented more quickly than actual waterbody 

improvement. In general, initial restoration planning is 

complete when each cause of impairment in a waterbody is 

covered by one or more of the following: an EPA approved 

TMDL, a watershed plan (e.g. TMDL alternative), or a 

statewide mercury reduction program consistent with EPA 

guidance. 

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 strategic target WQ-SP12.N11). 

Regions are encouraged to use some or all of the following 

strategies in marshalling resources to support waterbody 

and watershed restoration: 

• Realign water programs and resources as needed, including proposal of reductions in allocations among core 

water program implementation as reflected in commitments to annual program activity measure targets; 

• Coordinate waterbody restoration efforts with Section 

319 funds reserved for development of watershed plans; 

• Make effective use of state revolving funds provided 

under Title VI of the Clean Water Act; 

• Make effective use of water quality planning funds provided under Section 604(b) of the Clean Water Act; 

• Leverage resources available from other federal agencies, 

including the USDA; 

• Apply funds appropriated by Congress for watershed or 

related projects; and 

• A goal of the Assessment TMDL Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS) is to track several strategic plan 

measures. In a continuing effort to improve the ability 

of the ATTAINS data system to track measures using the 

2002 baseline waters, EPA is working with Regions 4 and 

8 to ensure that the 2002 baseline waters data available 

in ATTAINS accurately reflects the state reports. This 

quality assurance effort may result in corrections to the 

data component of the 2002 baseline. The goal is to have 

all corrections made by the time the FY 2012 Guidance 

commitment appendix is posted later this year and for 

ATTAINS to become the repository for measures WQ-21, 

WQ-SP10.N11, and WQ-SP11. 

EPA also recognizes that additional impaired waters are not 

included on state 303(d) lists because the standards 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 Integrated Reports – 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 should 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. 

Development of Measures for Improving Water 

Quality on a Watershed Basis 

Incremental Progress in Restoring Water Quality 

EPA has a suite of existing measures that track progress in 

water quality restoration: 

• Previously impaired waters now fully attaining water 

quality standards (WQ-SP10.N11). 

• Previously impaired waters for which a cause of impairment has been removed (WQ-SP11). 

• Impaired watersheds with water quality improvement 

(WQ-SP12.N11). 

• Net water quality restoration or maintenance by waterbody type (e.g., rivers, lakes) (WQ-SP13.N11 for wadeable 

streams). 

• Impaired waters where initial restoration planning (e.g., 

TMDLs) is complete (WQ-21). 

Existing measures, however, do not fully capture all types 

of restoration progress. Most waters take years to recover 

fully, and although incremental improvements represent 

progress these are currently not well represented. EPA has 

heard a strong message from states that new measures are 

needed to give credit for water quality improvement short 

National Water Program Guidance 26
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters 

of full WQS attainment. The major gap is tracking progress 

after TMDLs or other planning is complete, but before standards are fully met. 

In the draft FY 2012 Guidance, EPA proposed the addition 

of an indicator measure that was intended to demonstrate 

trends in improved water quality. EPA received many comments that the measure needed to be better defined. EPA is 

committed to developing a measure that captures incremental improvements. To address the concerns raised during 

the public comment process, EPA will use the EPA/State 

Monitoring Assessment Partnership (MAP) forum to refine 

the measure and develop technical guidance for reporting 

and tracking this measure. EPA will provide the technical 

approach in the FY 2013 Guidance so the reporting can start 

in FY 2014. 

319 Program Study and Potential Program Improvements 

and Accountability 

Nonpoint source pollution, caused by runoff that carries 

excess nutrients, pesticides, pathogens, toxics, and other 

contaminants to waterbodies, is the greatest remaining 

source of surface and ground water quality impairments 

and threats in the United States. Grants under Section 319 

of the Clean Water Act (CWA) are provided to help states, 

territories, and tribes implement their EPA-approved nonpoint source (NPS) management programs. The programs 

are designed to: (1) protect water quality by preventing 

or minimizing new NPS pollution, (2) improve impaired 

waters so that they ultimately meet water quality standards, 

(3) restore impaired waters so that they meet water quality standards, and (4) improve or restore those waters with 

deteriorated water quality that may not have been formally 

assessed by a state and added to the state’s Section 303(d) 

list of impaired waters. To better understand the effectiveness of various state NPS programs in reducing or eliminating nonpoint source pollution, EPA plans, in cooperation 

with state partners to complete a detailed study of how 

states are implementing their section 319 nonpoint source 

programs to protect and restore NPS-impaired waters. 

Based on the results of the study, EPA will engage the states 

in developing recommendations on program revisions, as 

appropriate, to maximize program effectiveness in protecting and restoring water quality and to assure program 

accountability. 

The study will provide valuable information on the range, 

extent, and effectiveness of a broad variety of program tools 

currently being used by the states to control NPS pollution, 

such as the development and implementation of watershedbased plans to remediate impaired waterbodies; the use 

of state-wide non-regulatory and regulatory approaches 

to achieve broad-scale implementation or compliance 

to address broadly pervasive issues (e.g. Animal Feeding Operations, cropland, and urban runoff); use of State 

Revolving Loan Funds, state funds, and other state-wide 

financial incentives/disincentives to achieve broad-scale 

implementation; and effectiveness of state-wide leveraging 

of authorities and resources of other federal and state agencies. The Agency will consult states frequently throughout 

the study and, ultimately, provide recommendations for 

potential program improvements, including incentives that 

are likely to improve the effectiveness of states’ nonpoint 

source management programs and/or the establishment 

of metrics to increase accountability for NPS pollution 

reduction. 

In the draft FY 2012 Guidance, EPA also proposed an indicator measure that captures the development of watershed 

management plans. EPA has decided to delay the inclusion 

of this measure in the Guidance until the results and recommendations from the program study are available. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Key program grants that support this Subobjective are: 

• The Clean Water Act Section 106 Water Pollution Control 

State Program grants; 

• The Clean Water Act Section 319 State program grant for 

nonpoint pollution control, including set-aside for Tribal 

programs; 

• Alaska Native Village Water and Wastewater Infrastructure grants; 

• CWSRF capitalization grants, including set-asides for 

planning under Section 604(b) of the Clean Water 

Act and for grants to tribes for wastewater treatment 

infrastructure. 

For additional information on these grants, see the grant 

program guidance on the website (http://www.epa.gov/ 

water/waterplan). 

2. Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Prevent water pollution and protect 

coastal and ocean systems to improve 

national coastal aquatic ecosystem health 

on the “good/fair/poor” scale of the 

National Coastal Condition Report. (Rating is a system in 

which 1 is poor and 5 is good.) 

2009 Baseline: 2.8	 2011 Commitment: 2.8 

2012 Target: 2.8	 2015 Target: 2.8 

(NOTE: Additional measures of progress are included in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key National Strategies 

Estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans are among the most 

productive ecosystems on earth, providing multiple ecological, economic, cultural, and aesthetic benefits and services. 

They are also among the most threatened ecosystems, 

largely as a result of rapidly increasing population growth 

and development. About half of the U.S. population now 

lives in coastal areas, and coastal counties are growing three 

times faster than counties elsewhere in the nation. The 

National Water Program Guidance 27
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Improve Coastal and Ocean Waters

overuse of natural resources and poor land use practices 

in upland as well as coastal areas have resulted in a host of 

human health and natural resource problems. 

For FY 2012, EPA’s national strategy for improving the 

condition of coastal and ocean waters will include the key 

elements identified below: 

• Maintain coastal monitoring and assessment; 

• Support state coastal protection programs; 

• Implement the National Estuary Program (NEP); and 

• Protect ocean resources. 

Effective implementation of the national water quality program, as well as of the ocean and coastal programs described 

in this section, will increase the likelihood of achieving the 

national and regional objectives described below. 

One important objective of the national strategy is to maintain a national coastal condition score of at least 2.8—the 

national baseline score in the 2009 National Coastal Condition Report (NCCR) III (see measure CO-222.N11). Another 

objective is to assess conditions in each major coastal region 

—Northeast, Southeast, West Coast, Puerto Rico, Gulf of 

Mexico, Hawaii, and South Central Alaska and to work with 

states, tribes, and other partners over the next five years to 

at least maintain each region’s coastal condition rating. 

EPA works with diverse partners to implement regionspecific protection and restoration programs. For example, 

EPA manages the National Estuary Program (NEP), the 

agency’s flagship place-based water quality protection and 

restoration effort. In addition, EPA works to protect and 

restore coastal water quality with the states, tribes, and 

other partners in the Gulf of Mexico, Chesapeake Bay, New 

England, and along the West Coast. Some of these efforts 

are described in more detail in Part III of this Guidance. 

1.	 Coastal Monitoring and Assessment 

EPA has made improved monitoring of water quality conditions a top priority for coastal as well as inland waters. 

Some of these data were collected by the OSV Bold. In FY 

2010, states completed field sampling under EPA’s National 

Coastal Condition Assessment program. Results of the 

sampling will serve as the basis for the National Coastal 

Condition Report V (NCCR V). In FY 2012, states will analyze 

sampling data and the National Water Program will work 

with states, tribes, and EPA’s Office of Research and Development to draft the NCCR V, which is planned for release in 

December 2012. Building on coastal condition assessment 

reports issued in 2001, 2004, 2008 and on the NCCR IV now 

scheduled for release in December 2011, 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 Clean Water Act 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 2012, EPA will coordinate with states interested in 

establishing “no discharge zones” to control vessel sewage. 

EPA will track total coastal and noncoastal statutory square 

miles protected by “no discharge zones” (see Program Activity Measure CO-2). 

3.	 Implement the National Estuary Program 

The National Estuary Program (NEP) is a local, stakeholderdriven, and collaborative program that protects and restores 

the water quality and ecological integrity of estuaries, for 

which goals are identified in Comprehensive Conservation 

and Management Plans (CCMPs). The NEP is comprised of 

28 estuaries of national significance along the east, west, 

Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean coasts. During FY 2012, EPA 

will continue supporting the NEPs’ implementation of their 

individual Comprehensive Conservation and Management 

Plans (CCMPs). 

The overall health of the nation’s estuarine ecosystems 

depends on the protection and restoration of high-quality 

habitat, EPA tracks the number of habitat acres that the 

NEPs and their partners annually protect and restore in 

their estuarine watersheds, or study areas. The numbers 

appear as environmental outcome measures under the 

Ocean/Coastal Subobjective. EPA has set a FY 2012 goal of 

protecting or restoring an additional 100,000 acres of habitat within the NEP study areas. 

EPA also tracks the annual and cumulative amount of cash 

and in-kind resources that NEP directors and/or staff are 

influential in obtaining. The measure depicts the level of 

resources leveraged by the CWA Section 320 base grants 

annually provided to the NEPs (see Program Activity Measure CO-4). 

Estuaries in the National Estuary Program 

Albemarle-Pamlico 

Sounds, NC 

Galveston Bay, TX New York/New Jersey 

Harbor, NY/NJ 

Barataria-Terrebonne, LA Indian River Lagoon, FL Peconic Bay, NY 

Barnegat Bay, NJ Long Island Sound, NY/CT Puget Sound, WA 

Buzzards Bay, MA Maryland Coastal Bays, MD San Francisco Bay, CA 

Casco Bay, ME Massachusetts Bay, MA San Juan Bay, PR 

Charlotte Harbor, FL Mobile Bay, AL Santa Monica Bay, CA 

Coastal Bend Bays & 

Estuaries, TX 

Morro Bay, CA Sarasota Bay, FL 

Lower Columbia River, 

OR/WA 

Narragansett Bay, RI Tampa Bay, FL 

Delaware Estuary, DE/NJ New Hampshire Estuaries, NH Tillamook Bay, OR 

Delaware Inland Bays, DE 

National Water Program Guidance 28
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Increase Wetlands 

4.		Ocean Protection Programs 

The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act 

(MPRSA, also called the Ocean Dumping Act) is the primary 

federal environmental statute governing transportation 

of dredged material and other material for the purpose of 

disposal into ocean waters, while Clean Water Act (CWA) 

Section 404 governs the discharge of dredged or fill material 

into “waters of the United States.” Several hundred million 

cubic yards of sediment are dredged from waterways, ports, 

and harbors every year to maintain the nation’s navigation 

system. This sediment must be disposed without causing 

adverse effects to the marine environment. EPA and the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) share responsibility 

for regulating how and where the disposal of dredged sediment occurs. 

EPA and USACE 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 (see Program 

Activity Measure CO-5), and increasing the beneficial use 

of dredged material. EPA will use the capability provided by 

the OSV Bold to monitor compliance with environmental 

requirements at ocean disposal sites (see Program Activity Measure CO-6). In addition, the Strategic Plan includes 

a measure of the percent of active ocean dredged material 

disposal sites that have achieved environmentally acceptable conditions (see CO-SP20.N11). 

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 2012, EPA will continue to participate on the Aquatic 

Nuisance Species Task Force, work with other agencies on 

ballast water discharge standards or controls (both through 

EPA’s Vessel General Permit and coordination with U.S. 

Coast Guard 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 Clean Water Act (CWA) 

to provide that no National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits shall be required under the 

CWA for discharges incidental to the normal operation of 

recreational vessels. Instead, the 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. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Grant resources directly supporting this work include the 

National Estuary Program grants and coastal nonpoint 

pollution control grants under the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program administered jointly by EPA and 

the NOAA (Section 6217 grant program). In addition, clean 

water program grants identified under the watershed subobjective support this work. For additional information on 

these grants, see the grant program guidance on the website 

(http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan). 

D) A Strategy for Addressing Climate Change 

1.		Support Evaluation of Sub-seabed and Ocean 

Sequestration of CO2 

EPA will work with other interested agencies and the international community to develop guidance on sub-seabed 

carbon sequestration and will address any requests for carbon sequestration in the sub-seabed or “fertilization” of the 

ocean, including any permitting under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) or the Underground Injection Control program that may be required. 

2.		“Climate Ready Estuaries” 

EPA will continue to build capacity within the National 

Estuary Program (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 revise and improve 

the internet based tool kit as a resource for other coastal 

communities working to adapt to climate change. 

3. Increase Wetlands 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

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. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key National Strategies 

Wetlands are among the nation’s most critical and productive natural resources. They provide a variety of benefits, 

such as water quality improvements, flood protection, 

shoreline erosion control, and ground water exchange. 

Wetlands are the primary habitat for fish, waterfowl, and 

wildlife, and as such, provide numerous opportunities for 

education, recreation, and research. EPA recognizes that the 

challenges the nation faces to conserve our wetland heritage 

are daunting and that many partners must work together in 

order for this effort to succeed. 

By 1997, the United States has lost more than 115 million 

acres of wetlands5

 to development, agriculture, and other 

uses. Today, the U.S. may be entering a period of annual net 

5 Dahl, T.E. 2000. Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 1986 to 1997. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 

National Water Program Guidance 29
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Increase Wetlands 

gain of wetlands acres for some wetland classes. Still, many 

wetlands in the U.S. are in less than pristine condition and 

many created wetlands, while beneficial, fail to replace the 

diverse plant and animal communities of wetlands lost. 

The 2006 National Wetlands Inventory Status and Trends 

Report6

, released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS), reports the quantity and type of wetlands in the 

conterminous United States. Although the report shows 

that overall gains in wetland acres exceeded overall losses 

from 1998 through 2004, this gain is primarily attributable 

to an increase in un-vegetated freshwater ponds, some of 

which (such as aquaculture ponds) may not provide wetlands services and others of which may have varying ecosystem value. The report notes the following trends in other 

wetland categories: freshwater vegetated wetlands declined 

by 0.5%, a smaller rate of loss than in preceding years; and 

estuarine vegetated wetlands declined by 0.7%, an increased 

rate of loss from the preceding years. The report does 

not assess the quality or condition of wetlands. The FWS 

expects to issue an updated report in the Spring of FY 2011. 

In addition the Status and Trends report, EPA is working 

with states, FWS, and other federal agencies to complete a 

National Wetland Condition Assessment by 2013 to effectively complement the FWS Status and Trends Reports and 

provide, for the first time, a snapshot of baseline wetland 

condition for the conterminous U.S. 

In a 2008 follow-up report7

, the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service, in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, analyzed the status and recent trends of wetland 

acreage in the coastal watersheds of the United States 

adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and Great 

Lakes between 1998 and 2004. Results indicate that Gulf of 

Mexico and Atlantic coast watersheds experienced a net loss 

in wetland area at an average annual rate of about 60,000 

acres over the 6-year study period. The fact that coastal 

watersheds were losing wetlands despite the national trend 

of net gains during the same study period points to the 

need for more assessment on the natural and human forces 

behind these trends and to an expanded effort on conservation of wetlands in these coastal areas. This point was 

highlighted in a 2008 report on wetland conservation by 

the Council on Environmental Quality. To that end, EPA, 

FWS, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service and Coastal 

Resources Center, the Army Corps of Engineers, USDA’s 

Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the Federal 

Highway Administration have begun working in partnership to determine the specific causes of this coastal wetland 

loss and to more specifically understand the tools, policies, 

and practices to successfully address it. 

In FY 2012, EPA will continue a multi-agency effort to 

comprehensively review and evaluate policy and practice for 

permitting mountaintop mining operations with the goal of 

reducing the harmful environmental effects of Appalachian 

surface coal mining. The multi-faceted initiative involves 

enhanced environmental review and coordination with the 

Army Corps of Engineers on Clean Water Act Section 404 

permits, more rigorous review of CWA Section 402 permits, 

coordination with the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) on 

Surface Mining Control and Reclamation (SMCRA) permits, 

and several significant technical documents and Clean 

Water Act policy actions to guide future practice in Appalachian surface coal mining. Policy actions include: publication of a rule addressing fill material, support improved and 

strengthened state oversight of proposed permits using 

state 401 water quality certification authority, consider 

other regulatory and/or policy modifications to better 

protect the environment and public health from the impacts 

of Appalachian surface coal mining, and improve compensatory mitigation for stream and wetland impacts from 

permitted mining activities. 

EPA’s Wetlands Program combines technical and financial 

assistance to state, tribal, and local partners with outreach 

and education, in addition to wetlands regulation under 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 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. These strategies are 

in part reflected in the following measures. 

1.	No Net Loss 

EPA contributes to achieving no overall net loss of wetlands 

through the wetlands regulatory program established under 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE) and EPA jointly administer 

the Section 404 program, which regulates the discharge of 

dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, 

including wetlands. EPA tracks performance through budget 

measure WT-SP22. 

EPA will continue to work with USACE to ensure application of the Section 404(b)(1) 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 the Corps issuing a 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 

6 Dahl, T.E. 2006. Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous United States 1998 to 2004. U.S. Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 7 Stedman, S. and T.E. Dahl. 2008. Status and trends of wetlands in the coastal watersheds of the Eastern United States 1998 to 2004. National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 

National Water Program Guidance 30
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Restore and Improve Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands �	 Increase Wetlands 

measures to avoid and/or mitigate such impacts through 

comments to the Corps. In FY 2012, EPA will continue to 

track the effectiveness of EPA’s environmental review of 

CWA Section 404 permits (see Program Activity Measure 

WT-3). Each EPA region will also identify opportunities to 

partner with the Corps in meeting performance measures 

for compliance with 404(b)(1) 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. 

2.	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 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and non-federal programs. 

EPA will work to improve levels of wetland protection by 

states and via EPA and other federal programs through 

actions that include: 

• Working with and integrating wetlands protection into 

other EPA programs such as Clean Water Act Section 319, 

State Revolving Fund, National Estuary Program, and 

Brownfields; 

• Providing grants and technical assistance to state, tribal, 

or local organizations; 

• Developing technical assistance and informational tools 

for wetlands protection; and 

• Collaborating with USDA, DOI, NOAA, and other federal 

agencies with wetlands restoration programs to ensure 

the greatest environmental outcomes. 

For FY 2012, 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 Program Activity Measure WT-1. These 

acres may include those supported by Wetland Five-Star 

Restoration Grants, the National Estuary Program, Section 319 nonpoint source grants, Brownfield grants, EPA’s 

Great Waterbody Programs, and other EPA programs. 

This does not include enforcement or mitigation acres. 

EPA greatly exceeded its target for this Program Activity 

Measure in 2009 and 2010, mainly due to unexpected 

accomplishments from National Estuary Program 

enhancement projects. Based on five year trend data, the 

target will be at 170,000 cumulative acres for FY 2011, as 

measured against a FY 2005 baseline. 

State/Tribal Programs: A key objective of EPA’s wetlands 

program is building the capacity of states and tribes in the 

following core elements of a wetlands program: wetland 

monitoring; regulation including 401 certification; voluntary restoration and protection; and water quality standards for wetlands. 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. Program Activity Measures 

WT-2a and WT-2b reflect EPA’s goal of increasing state and 

tribal capacity in these core wetland management areas. 

In reporting progress under measures WT-2a and WT-2b, 

EPA will assess the number of states and tribes that have 

substantially increased their capacity in one or more core 

elements, as well as track those core elements that states 

and tribes have developed to a point where they are fully 

functional. This is an indicator measure. 

•		 Regulatory Program Performance: EPA and the Corps of 

Engineers have partnered to develop and refine a Clean 

Water Act Section 404 permit database (ORM 2.0) that 

enables more insightful data collection on the performance of the Section 404 regulatory program. Using 

ORM 2.0 as a data source, Program Activity Measure 

WT-3 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. This 

measure will remain an indicator until enough data is 

collected to define a meaningful target. This is also an 

indicator measure. 

•		 Wetland Monitoring: 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 

actively 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 

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 National Wetland Condition Assessment (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 will be concluded in 2011, 

National Water Program Guidance 31
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Restore and Improve Fresh Waters, Coastal Waters, and Wetlands Increase Wetlands 

with data analysis scheduled for 2012. The final NWCA 

report is expected in 2013. 

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. At the end of 

FY 2010, 22 states were measuring and reporting baseline 

wetland condition in the state using condition indicators 

and assessments (see Program Activity Measure WT-4). By 

the end of FY 2012, EPA projects at least 26 states will be 

doing the same. States should also have plans to eventually 

document trends in wetland condition over time. Examples 

of activities indicating the state is “on track” include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Building technical and financial capacity to conduct an 

“intensification study” as part of the 2011 National Wetland Condition Assessment; 

• Developing or adapting wetland assessment tools for use 

in the state; 

• Monitoring activity is 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). 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Examples of grant resources supporting this work include 

the Wetland Program Development Grants, Five Star Restoration Grants, the Clean Water Act Section 319 Grants, 

the Brownfields grants, and the National Estuary Program 

Grants. For additional information on these grants, see the 

grant program guidance on the website (http://www.epa. 

gov/water/waterplan). In addition, some states and tribes 

have utilized Clean Water Act Section 106 funds for program implementation, including wetlands monitoring and 

protection projects. 

National Water Program Guidance 32
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 		

	 	 		

	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Improve the Health of the Great Lakes 

IV. Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic 

Ecosystems 

T

he core programs of the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act are essential for the protection of the nation’s 

drinking water and fresh waters, coastal waters, and wetlands. At the same time, additional, intergovernmental 

efforts are sometimes needed to protect and restore communities and large aquatic ecosystems around the county. For 

many years, EPA has worked with state and local governments, tribes, and others to implement supplemental programs to 

restore and protect the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, the Gulf of Mexico, and the waters along the U.S.-Mexico Border. 

More recently EPA has developed new, cooperative initiatives addressing Long Island Sound, South Florida, Puget Sound, 

the Columbia River, San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary, and the waters of the Pacific Islands. 

1. Improve the Health of the 

 Great Lakes 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Improve the overall ecosystem health 

of the Great Lakes by preventing water 

pollution and protecting aquatic ecosystem (using the Great Lakes 40-point 

scale). 

2005 Baseline: 21.5 points	 2009 Result 23.9 

2010 Result: 22.7	 2011 Commitment: 23.4 

2012 Target: 23.9	 2014 Target: 24.7 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Strategies 

As the largest surface freshwater system on the face of the 

earth, the Great Lakes ecosystem holds the key to the quality of life and economic prosperity for tens of millions of 

people. While significant progress has been made to restore 

the environmental health of the Great Lakes, much work 

remains to be done. 

During 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) began implementing President Obama’s Great Lakes 

Restoration Initiative (GLRI), the largest investment in the 

Great Lakes in decades. The GLRI invests in the region’s 

environmental and public health through a coordinated 

interagency process led by EPA. As outlined in the GLRI 

Action Plan released by the Administrator and governors, 

this unprecedented program focuses on five major restoration priorities: (1) reducing toxic substances and restoring 

Areas of Concern; (2) advancing a “zero tolerance” policy 

toward invasive species; (3) improving near-shore health 

and reducing non-point source pollution; (4) restoring and 

protecting habitat, including reducing species loss; and (5) 

ensuring the information, engagement, and accountability 

in the program overall. In FY 2012, the President has proposed $350 million for the Initiative to strategically implement both federal projects and projects with states, tribes, 

municipalities, universities, and other organizations. 

The Action Plan identifies goals, objectives, measurable ecological targets, and specific actions for each of the five focus 

areas identified above. The Action Plan is used by federal 

agencies in the development of the federal budget for Great 

Lakes restoration in fiscal years 2012 and beyond. As such, 

it serves as guidance for collaborative restoration work with 

participants to advance restoration. The Action Plan also 

helps advance the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 

with Canada. Traditional infrastructure financing under 

Clean and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, and 

Superfund cleanup enforcement are important examples 

of work which, though outside the Initiative’s scope, will 

also continue to be essential to Great Lakes protection and 

restoration. EPA is working with states and tribes to ensure 

that these high priority activities are targeted to help further clean up the Great Lakes. 

Under the Initiative, EPA will administer funding individually and with other federal agencies to implement priority 

federal projects as well as other programs undertaken by 

nonfederal entities that support the Action Plan. Funding 

will be provided through grants and cooperative agreements 

or through interagency agreements that allow the transfer 

of funds to other federal agencies for subsequent use and 

distribution. Most grants will be issued competitively. The 

principles of accountability, action, and urgency underlie 

the Action Plan. 

Continued progress is dependent on continued work to 

implement core Clean Water Act programs and appropriately targeted supplementation of those programs. These 

programs provide a foundation of water pollution control 

that is critical to the success of efforts to restore and protect 

the Great Lakes. While the Great Lakes face a range of 

unique pollution problems (extensive sediment contamination and atmospheric deposition) they also face problems 

common to most other waterbodies around the country. 

Effective implementation of core programs, such as discharge permits, nonpoint pollution controls, wastewater 

treatment, wetlands protection, and appropriate designation of uses and criteria, must be fully and effectively implemented throughout the Great Lakes Basin. 

In its third year, the GLRI will support programs and projects strategically chosen to target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem through 

direct program implementation by EPA and Interagency 

Task Force members. This will be accomplished by issuing 

National Water Program Guidance 33
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Improve the Health of the Great Lakes 

grants and other agreements to states, tribes, municipalities, universities, and other organizations. Guided by 

the GLRI Action Plan, Agencies are shifting efforts for a 

stronger emphasis on implementation actions and results 

in the Initiative’s focus areas. A special focus is being placed 

on restoring Areas of Concern (AOC) throughout the Basin, 

using Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) cleanups of contaminated sediments to address beneficial use impairments 

(BUIs). Programs and projects expected to be initiated 

in FY 2012 are selected via a planning process conducted 

through the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force. This 

process includes competitive grant programs to implement 

the Initiative by funding states, tribes, and other partners. 

Key activities expected to advance environmental progress 

within each of the Initiative’s focus areas are described 

below: 

•		 Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern: EPA is working 

closely with non-federal partners to address beneficial use 

impairments in Areas of Concerns, including GLLA cleanups of contaminated sediments. 

•		Invasive Species: GLRI has supported priority Asian carp 

work including; the installation of structures by the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) at the electric barrier 

site to reduce the risk of bypass by Asian carp; and Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Illinois Department of 

Natural Resource efforts to detect and remove Asian Carp 

from the system. As needed, GLRI will invest in efforts 

to keep Asian carp from becoming established in the 

Great Lakes through the support of priorities, such as 

the development of Ballast Water Treatment technologies; assistance to states and communities in preventing the introduction of invasive species and controlling 

existing populations; establishing early detection and 

rapid response capabilities; and the implementation of 

Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plans by the FWS 

partnership. 

•		 Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source: Watershed 

plans will be implemented by EPA, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS), FWS, USGS, state programs, and tribal governments. Additionally, GLRI funds have been marked for 

NRCS to work directly with agricultural producers in targeted watersheds to implement conservation practices to 

reduce soil erosion and non-point source nutrient loading 

to waters of the Great Lakes Basin. 

•		 Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration: GLRI 

funds will support an FWS led multistate, bi-national 

recovery program to manage extinction threats to the 

endangered piping plover; U.S. Forest Service projects 

that replace culverts and road crossings in order to 

improve fish passage; BIA wetland restoration projects 

in tribal areas; restoration of degraded habitats in AOCs; 

and USACE and NOAA programs to assist local communities in implementing habitat restoration projects in 

coastal areas. 

•		 Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, 

Communication, and Partnerships: EPA and partner 

agencies will enhance existing programs that measure 

and assess the physical, biological, and chemical integrity 

of the Great Lakes. EPA will continue to refine the Great 

Lakes Accountability System, the publicly accessible 

database which partner agencies use to regularly report 

on their progress to meet the objectives the GLRI Action 

Plan. 

Progress will be tracked against measures of progress in 

each Focus Area, including: 

Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern 

• Implementation of management actions necessary for 

delisting Great Lakes Areas of Concern. 

• Removal of Beneficial Use Impairments. 

• Remediation of contaminated sediments. 

• Cumulative decline of PCBs in Great Lakes fish. 

Invasive Species 

• Number of nonnative species newly detected in the Great 

Lakes ecosystem. 

• Acres managed for populations of invasive species controlled to a target level. 

• Number multi-agency rapid response plans established, 

mock exercises to practice responses carried out under 

those plans, and/or actual response actions. 

Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source Pollution 

• Loadings of soluble reactive phosphorus from tributaries 

draining targeted watersheds. 

• Percent of days of the beach season that Great Lakes 

beaches monitored by state beach safety programs are 

open and safe for swimming. 

• Acres in the Great Lakes watershed with USDA conservation practices implemented to reduce erosion, nutrients, 

and/or pesticide loading. 

Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration 

• Percent of populations of native aquatic non-threatened 

and endangered species self-sustaining in the wild. 

• Number of acres of wetlands and wetland-associated 

uplands protected, restored and enhanced. 

• Number of acres of coastal, upland, and island habitats 

protected, restored and enhanced. 

• Number of species delisted due to recovery. 

Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication and Partnerships 

• Improvement in the overall aquatic ecosystem health of 

the Great Lakes using the Great Lakes 40-point scale. 

National Water Program Guidance 34
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay 

C) Grant Program Resources In the last 25 years, the CBP partners have achieved imporMost EPA grants will be issued competitively in support tant progress: 

of progress in the GLRI Action Plan focus areas. Other 

members of the Interagency Task Force are also expected to 

select proposals, issue grants, and provide other assistance 

with funding from the Initiative. 

In addition, the Great Lakes National Program Office 

negotiates grants resources with states and tribes, focusing 

on joint priorities, such as AOC restoration, pursuant to 

Remedial Action Plans, and Lakewide Management Plans 

implementation. Additional information concerning these 

resources is provided in the grant program guidance website 

(http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/glf.html). This website 

also links to information requesting proposals for monitoring and evaluation of contaminated sediments or for remediation of contaminated sediments, a non-grant program 

pursuant to the Great Lakes Legacy Act. 

2. Improve the Health of the 

Chesapeake Bay 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Improve the Health of the Chesapeake 

Bay Ecosystem. 

(Note: Measures of progress are identified in Appendices A 

and E.) 

B) Key Strategies 

The Chesapeake Bay— the largest estuary in the United 

States— is a complex ecosystem that includes important 

habitats and food webs. The Chesapeake Bay watershed 

includes more than 64,000 square miles of land, encompassing parts of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia and the entire District of 

Columbia. Threading through the Bay watershed are more 

than 100,000 tributaries that flow into the Bay. The community, environmental, and economic health and vitality 

of the Bay and its watershed are impacted by the quality of 

the Bay’s waters and the biological, physical, and chemical 

conditions of the Bay watershed. 

The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) is a unique regional 

partnership that has coordinated and conducted the 

restoration of the Chesapeake Bay since 1983. CBP partners include the states of Delaware, Maryland, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia; the District of 

Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission (CBC); the 

Environmental Protection Agency, representing the federal 

government; and advisory groups of citizens, scientists, and 

local government officials. 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 the Chesapeake Bay 

Commission, 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. 

• Promulgated the nation’s largest total maximum daily 

load (TMDL) with excellent supporting science; 

• Adopted the nation’s first consistent water quality standards and assessment procedures, prompting major state 

and local investments in nutrient removal technologies 

across hundreds of wastewater treatment facilities; 

• Established nutrient management plans on more than 3 

million farmland acres; 

• Preserved more than one million acres of forests, wetlands, farmland and other natural resources, meeting the 

Program’s Land Preservation goal two years early; 

• Developed science, data monitoring, models, and measures that are recognized as some of the best and most 

extensive in the country and often around the world; 

• Placed moratoria on striped bass harvests, leading to 

restoration of the stock that supports 90 percent of the 

Atlantic Coast population; 

• Advanced use of conservation tillage, now practiced on 

more than two million acres; 

• Planted more than seven thousand miles of streamside 

forested buffers; 

• Restored nearly 15 thousand acres of wetlands; and 

• Removed blockages to more than two thousand miles of 

spawning grounds to help restore migratory fish. 

Despite 25 years of progress, the health of the Bay and its 

watershed remains in poor condition. 

In May 2009, the EC pledged to put all Bay management 

mechanisms necessary to restore the Bay in place by 2025 

and agreed to use short-term goals, called milestones, to 

increase restoration work. Every two years, the Bay jurisdictions will meet milestones for implementing measures 

to reduce pollution, with the first set of milestones due in 

December 2011. 

On May 12, 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 

(EO) 13508 on Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration. 

The EO has brought the Chesapeake Bay Program to a new 

level of interagency coordination and cooperation. The EO 

establishes the purpose of concerted, coordinated federal 

agency action: “to protect and restore the health, heritage, 

natural resources and economic value of the Nation’s largest 

estuarine ecosystem and the natural sustainability of its 

watershed.” 

On May 12, 2010, in response to EO 13508, EPA and the 

other federal agencies, identified in the EO, released a strategy to coordinate, expand, and bring greater accountability 

to efforts to help speed the Bay’s recovery. The coordinated 

strategy defines environmental goals and milestones, identifies key indicators of progress, describes specific programs 

and strategies to be implemented, identifies mechanisms 

National Water Program Guidance 35
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Improve the Health of the Chesapeake Bay 

to ensure coordinated and effective activities, and outlines 

adaptive management to make necessary adjustments. 

In June 2010, EPA launched ChesapeakeStat, a systematic 

process within the partnership for analyzing information 

and data to continually assess progress towards goals and 

adapt strategies and tactics when needed. ChesapeakeStat 

includes a public website that promotes improved accountability, fosters coordination, and promotes transparency 

by sharing performance information on goals, indicators, 

strategies, and funding. 

In September 2010, the EO agencies released their first 

annual action plan with more detailed information about 

the EO strategy initiatives to be undertaken in 2011. 

This will be followed in early 2012 by the first annual EO 

progress report. Federal agencies will join the states in 

establishing two-year milestones with many federal efforts 

designed to support the state and the District in meeting 

their current and future water quality milestones. Federal 

agencies will also develop appropriate two-year milestones 

for other outcomes outlined in the strategy, beyond those 

for water quality. 

On December 29, 2010, EPA established the Chesapeake 

Bay TMDL, a historic and comprehensive “pollution diet” 

with rigorous accountability measures to initiate sweeping actions to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay 

and the region’s streams, creeks, and rivers. The TMDL was 

prompted by insufficient restoration progress over the last 

several decades in the Bay. The TMDL is required under 

federal law and responds to consent decrees in Virginia and 

D.C. dating back to the late 1990s. It is also a keystone commitment of the EO strategy. The TMDL – the largest ever 

developed by EPA – includes pollution limits to meet water 

quality standards in the Bay and its tidal rivers. The TMDL 

is designed to ensure that all pollution control measures to 

fully restore the Bay and its tidal rivers are in place by 2025, 

with 60 percent of the actions completed by 2017. The 

TMDL is supported by rigorous accountability measures to 

ensure cleanup commitments are met, including short-and 

long-term benchmarks, a tracking and accounting system 

for jurisdiction activities, and federal contingency actions 

that can be employed if necessary to spur progress. 

The Year Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities 

EPA’s focus in FY 2012 will be to continue to improve the 

rate of progress in restoring the Chesapeake Bay by meeting the President’s expectations as described in EO 13508, 

using the agency’s existing statutory authority, developing 

more rigorous 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 will work with the states to build and refine a transparent accountability system. This system is expected to 

provide EPA, the states, local governments, and the public a 

clear understanding of how the TMDL is being implemented 

and attained through appropriate point and nonpoint 

source controls to meet the basin-jurisdiction loading 

targets identified in two-year milestones. The system is also 

expected to track any offsets that are relied upon to achieve 

the TMDL allocations and build appropriate accountability 

for implementation of such offsets. 

EPA monitoring of the states’ progress under the TMDL 

will include evaluation of whether the states two-year 

milestones are consistent with the expectations and the 

load and wasteload allocations in the TMDL. EPA will also 

monitor whether a jurisdiction has implemented point and 

nonpoint source controls to meet the basin-jurisdiction 

loading targets identified in its two-year milestones. 

The EO specifically cites the need for strengthening the 

scientific support for actions to better protect and restore 

the water quality and ecological integrity of the entire Bay 

watershed, and calls for focused and coordinated habitat 

and research activities directed toward living resources and 

water quality. EPA is working with the other CBP partners 

to expand the scientific capabilities of the program. New 

decision support tools and an expanded set of models will 

allow for better prioritization and adjustment of management activities. 

In FY 2012, EPA will use its technical and scientific analysis 

capabilities to provide support and guidance to the jurisdictions as they work to involve thousands of local governments that will be affected by 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. 

In FY 2012, EPA also will continue the development and 

implementation of new regulations to protect and restore 

the Chesapeake Bay. EPA will continue work on rulemakings 

under the Clean Water Act to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment pollution in the Bay from concentrated 

animal feeding operations, stormwater discharges from new 

and redeveloped properties, new or expanded discharges, 

and other pollutant discharges as necessary. 

EPA will use its resources to develop the scientific underpinnings of the new regulations, which likely will include 

enhanced understanding of the loads contributed by various 

pollution sources in specific geographies. EPA has committed to reducing air deposition of nitrogen to the tidal 

waters of the Bay from 17.9 to 15.7 million pounds per year 

through federal air regulations during the coming years. 

To ensure that the jurisdictions are able to meet EPA’s 

expectations under the TMDL and new rulemakings, EPA 

will continue its broad range of grant programs. Most significantly, EPA will continue funding for state implementation 

and enforcement, directing recipients to give preference 

to priority strategies, practices, and watersheds that will 

result in the greatest benefits to water quality in the Bay, 

consistent with the Chesapeake Bay Program’s ongoing 

efforts to use the most accurate and appropriate science to 

National Water Program Guidance 36
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect the Gulf of Mexico 

identify priority watersheds and practices. Priority strategies and practices would be those identified in jurisdictions’ 

Watershed Implementation Plans as necessary to achieve 

nutrient and sediment reductions to meet Chesapeake Bay 

TMDL allocations. Priority practices are also those proven, 

cost-effective practices that reduce or prevent the greatest 

nutrient and sediment loads to the Chesapeake Bay. 

Ensuring that the regulated community complies with the 

appropriate regulations is an essential responsibility for 

achieving the goals established for the Chesapeake Bay and 

its watershed. In FY 2012, the Enforcement and Compliance 

Assistance program will use its Bay-related resource allocation to focus on sectors contributing significant amounts 

of nutrients, sediment and other contaminants to impaired 

watersheds in the Bay, including CAFOs, stormwater point 

source discharges (including discharges from municipal 

separate storm, sewer systems, stormwater discharges from 

construction sites and other industrial facilities), municipal and industrial wastewater facilities, and air deposition 

sources of nitrogen, including power plants. EPA also will 

identify appropriate opportunities for compliance and 

enforcement activities related to dredge and fill operations, 

federal facilities, and Superfund sites, including remedial 

action and removal sites, and Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facilities. 

More specifically, EPA’s compliance and enforcement review 

will be focused on the following areas: 

• Superfund and RCRA: Elizabeth River; Anacostia River; 

and Patapsco River (Baltimore Harbor); 

• CAFOs: Three geographic areas that represent the greatest contributions of manure-based agriculture nutrient 

loads to the Bay; 

• Wastewater: Significant wastewater facilities under permit schedules for upgrading treatment; 

• Stormwater: Permit non-compliance related to municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), construction 

activity and priority industrial sectors within geographic 

hot-spots that are critical to restoration of the Bay; and 

• Air deposition: Stationary sources and mobile sources at 

port facilities, warehouses, and construction sites within 

the Chesapeake Bay airshed. 

In addition, enforcement resources will support the Agency’s priority to restore the Chesapeake Bay by providing 

information about wet weather sources of pollution. This 

will result in an increase in knowledge, use, transparency, 

and public access to data about wet weather sources through: 

a) building an electronic reporting module for getting nonmajor permit data into ICIS-NPDES to pilot with states in 

the Chesapeake Bay; b) building and deploying targeting 

tools to help identify the most significant sources of noncompliance and discharges of pollutants most responsible 

for the impairment of this important water body; and c) 

making all non-enforcement confidential data available, 

with easy-to-use tools to aid in the public’s ability to use 

and understand the data. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Resources supporting this goal include grant authorizes 

under Section 117 of the Clean Water Act. For additional 

information on these grants, see the grant program guidance at http://www.epa.gov/region03/chesapeake/grants. 

htm. 

3. Restore and Protect the Gulf of 

Mexico 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Improve the overall health of coastal 

waters of the Gulf of Mexico (by 0.2) 

on the “good/fair/poor” scale of the 

National Coastal Condition Report (a 

5-point system in which 1 is poor and 

5 is good): 

2004 Baseline: 2.4	 2010 Actual: n/a 

2011 Commitment: 2.6	 2012 Target: 2.6 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Strategies 

The Gulf of Mexico basin 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 percent of 

the nation’s commercial fishery landings, and Gulf Coast 

wetlands comprise about half the national total and provide 

critical habitat for 75 percent of the migratory waterfowl 

traversing the United States. 

1.	 Healthy and Resilient Coastal Habitats 

Healthy and resilient coastal habitats sustain many ecosystem services upon which humans rely. Reversing ongoing 

habitat degradation and preserving the remaining healthy 

habitats is necessary to protecting the communities, cultures, and economy of the Gulf Coast. The overall wetland 

loss in the Gulf area is on the order of 50 percent, 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 2012 (see 

Program Activity Measure GM-SP39). EPA 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. 

National Water Program Guidance 37
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect the Gulf of Mexico 

2.	 Sustainable Coastal Barriers 

The Gulf Coast supports a diverse array of coastal, estuarine, nearshore and offshore ecosystems, including seagrass 

beds, wetlands and marshes, mangroves, barrier islands, 

sand dunes, coral reefs, maritime forests, bayous, streams, 

and rivers. These ecosystems provide numerous ecological 

and economic benefits including water quality, nurseries for 

fish, wildlife habitat, hurricane and flood buffers, erosion 

prevention, stabilized shorelines, tourism, jobs, and recreation. Coastal communities continuously face and adapt to 

various challenges of living along the Gulf of Mexico. The 

economic, ecological, and social losses from coastal hazard 

events have grown as population growth places people in 

harm’s way and as the ecosystems’ natural resilience is compromised by development and pollution. In order to sustain 

and grow the Gulf region’s economic prosperity, individuals, businesses, communities, and ecosystems all need to be 

more adaptable to change. In 2012, 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 with NOAA, Sea 

Grant Programs, and the U.S. Geological Survey in support 

of this goal. 

3.	 Wise Use of Sediment Resources 

The wise management of sediments for wetland creation, 

enhancement, and sustainability is of critical importance 

to the Gulf Coast region, especially given locally high rates 

of subsidence and the region-wide threat from potential 

future impacts of climate change. To successfully sustain 

and enhance coastal ecosystems, a broad sediment management effort is needed that incorporates beneficial use of 

dredge material, and other means of capturing all available 

sediment resources. 

Healthy estuaries and coastal wetlands depend on a balanced level of nutrients. Excessive nutrient levels can 

have negative impacts such as reducing the abundance of 

recreationally and commercially important fishery species. 

Excess nutrients is identified as one of the primary problems facing Gulf estuaries and coastal waters. Over the next 

several years, the Gulf states will be establishing criteria for 

nutrients in coastal ecosystems that will guide regulatory, 

land use, and water quality protection decisions. Nutrient 

criteria could potentially reverse current trends in nutrient 

pollution to coastal waters and estuaries, but the challenge 

is to prevent or reduce the man-made sources of nutrients 

to levels that maintain ecosystem productivity and restore 

beneficial uses. In 2012, EPA will support coastal nutrient 

criteria and standards development with a Gulf state pilot 

and will develop science and management tools for the 

characterization of nutrients in coastal ecosystems. Because 

the five Gulf states face similar nutrient management 

challenges at both the estuary level and as the receiving 

water for the entire Mississippi River watershed, the Gulf 

of Mexico Alliance Partnership is an important venue to 

build and test management tools to reduce nutrients in Gulf 

waters and achieve healthy and resilient coastal ecosystems. 

Any strategy to improve the overall health of the entire Gulf 

of Mexico must include a focused effort to reduce the size 

of the zone of hypoxic conditions (i.e., low oxygen in the 

water) in the northern Gulf. Actions to address this problem 

must focus on both localized pollutant addition throughout 

the Basin and on nutrient loadings from the Mississippi 

River. EPA, in cooperation with states and other federal 

agencies, supports the long-term target to reduce the size of 

the hypoxic zone from about 17,300 square km to less than 

5,000 square km, measured as a five-year running average 

(see Program Activity Measure GM-SP40.N11). 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 2012, EPA’s Mississippi River Basin 

program 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, and other federal agencies, EPA will help target efforts within critical watersheds to implement effective 

strategies that can yield significant progress in addressing 

nonpoint source nutrient pollution. 

4. Improve Science Monitoring and Management Efforts 

The Clean Water Act provides authority and resources 

that are essential to protecting water quality in the Gulf of 

Mexico and in the larger Mississippi River Basin that contributes pollution, especially oxygen demanding nutrients, 

to the Gulf. Enhanced monitoring and research is needed in 

the Gulf Coast region to make data more readily available. 

EPA regions and the Gulf of Mexico Program Office will 

work with states to continue to maximize the efficiency and 

utility of water quality monitoring efforts for local managers by coordinating and standardizing state and federal 

water quality data collection activities in the Gulf region 

and to 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, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and 

the U.S. Geological Survey 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 13 priority coastal watersheds. These 13 watersheds include 755 of 

the impaired segments identified by states around the Gulf 

and will receive targeted technical and financial assistance 

to restore impaired waters. The FY 2012 goal is to fully 

attain water quality standards in at least 132 of these segments (see Program Activity Measure GM-SP38). 

National Water Program Guidance 38
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect Long Island Sound 

Harmful algal blooms (HABs) cause public health advisories, 

halt commercial and recreational shellfish harvesting, limit 

recreation, exacerbate human respiratory problems, and 

cause fish kills. EPA is working with Mexico and the Gulf 

states to implement an advanced detection forecasting capability system to manage harmful algal blooms and for notifying public health managers (see Program Activity Measure 

GM-01) and expects to expand the system in 2012 by providing support for taxonomy training in Yucatan and Quintana 

Roo to complete the training in all six Mexican States. 

The Gulf of Mexico Program Office has a long-standing 

commitment to develop effective partnerships with other 

programs within EPA, in other federal agencies, and with 

other organizations. For example, the Program Office is 

working with the EPA Office of Research and Development 

and other federal agencies to develop and implement a 

coastal monitoring program to better assess the condition 

of Gulf waters. 

5.	 Environmental Education 

Education and outreach are essential to accomplish EPA’s 

overall goals and are integral to all priority issues. It is critical that Gulf residents and decision makers understand and 

appreciate the connection between the ecological health 

of the Gulf of Mexico and its watersheds and coasts, their 

own health, the economic vitality of their communities, and 

their overall quality of life. There is a nationwide need for a 

better understanding of the link between the health of the 

Gulf of Mexico and the U.S. economy. The long-term goal 

is to increase awareness and stewardship of Gulf coastal 

resources and promote action among Gulf citizens. In 2012, 

the Gulf of Mexico Program will establish public and private 

support for the development and deployment of the Gulf 

Coastal Ecosystem Learning Centers Rotational Educational 

Exhibits Initiative; foster regional stewardship and awareness of Gulf coastal resources through annual Gulf Guardian 

Awards; and support initiatives that include direct involvement from underserved and underrepresented populations 

and enhance local capacity to reach these populations. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

The Gulf of Mexico Program issues an annual competitive Funding Announcement for Gulf of Mexico Regional 

Partnership projects that improve the health of the Gulf of 

Mexico by addressing improved water quality and public 

health, priority coastal habitat protection/recovery, more 

effective coastal environmental education, improved habitat 

identification/characterization data and decision support 

systems, and strategic nutrient reductions. Projects must 

actively involve stakeholders and focus on support and 

implementation of the Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Restoration Strategy. 

For additional information on these grants, see the grant 

program guidance on the website (http://www.epa.gov/ 

gmpo). 

4. Restore and Protect Long Island 

Sound 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Prevent water pollution, improve water 

quality, protect aquatic ecosystems, and 

restore habitat of Long Island Sound. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Program Strategies 

More that 20 million people live within 50 miles of Long 

Island Sound’s shores and more than one billion gallons per 

day of treated effluent enter the Sound from 106 treatment 

plants. In a 1992 study, it was estimated that the Sound 

generated more than $5.5 billion to the regional economy 

from clean water-related activities alone—recreational 

and commercial fishing and shellfishing, beach-going, and 

swimming. In 2011 dollars, that value is now $8.91 billion. The Sound also generates additional billions of dollars 

through transportation, ports, harbors, real estate, and 

other cultural and aesthetic values. The Sound is breeding 

ground, nursery, feeding ground, and habitat to more than 

170 species of fish and 1,200 invertebrate species that are 

under stress from development, competing human uses, 

and climate change. 

The key environmental and ecological outcomes for Long 

Island Sound include: 

• Marine and tributary waters that meet prescribed state 

water quality standards—waters that are fishable, swimmable, and that support; 

• Diverse habitats of healthy, abundant and sustainable 

populations of aquatic and marine-dependent species in; 

• An ambient environment that is free of substances that 

are potentially harmful to human health or that otherwise may adversely affect the food chain; and 

• An educated and informed citizenry who participates in 

the restoration and protection of this invaluable resource. 

EPA will continue to work with the Long Island Sound Study 

(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 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) to restore and protect 

the Sound. Because levels of dissolved oxygen 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 water quality standards. 

1.	 Reduce Nitrogen Loads 

The Long Island Sound bi-state nitrogen TMDL, approved 

by EPA in 2000, relies on flexible and innovative 

approaches, notably bubble permits, management zones, 

and exchange ratios that allow sewage treatment plant 

(STP) operators to trade nitrogen reduction obligations 

National Water Program Guidance 39
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	

	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect Long Island Sound 

with each other. This approach helps attain water quality 

improvement goals, while allowing communities to save an 

estimated $800 million by allocating reductions to those 

STPs where they can be achieved most economically, and to 

STPs that have the greatest impact on water quality. 

The States of New York and Connecticut will continue to 

allocate resources toward STP upgrades to control nitrogen 

discharges to meet TMDL requirements. These states will 

monitor and report discharges through EPA’s Permit Compliance System (PCS) and Discharge Monitoring Reports 

(DMRs). A revised TMDL will incorporate updated state 

marine water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, as well 

as other refined or updated technical data. 

The State of Connecticut will continue to implement its 

Nitrogen Credit Exchange program, first instituted in 2002. 

Reductions in nitrogen discharges at STPs that go beyond 

TMDL requirements create the state’s system of market 

credits, which will continue to assist municipalities in reducing construction costs and more effectively address nitrogen 

reductions to the Sound. New York City will continue its 

STP nitrogen upgrades and will minimize the impact of 

nitrogen discharges to the Sound as construction proceeds 

through 2017. Westchester County will continue construction upgrades at its two affected STPs to control its nitrogen 

discharges to the Western Sound. 

EPA will continue to work with the upper Long Island Sound 

watershed States of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and 

Vermont to implement state plans that identify and control 

nitrogen discharges to the Connecticut River. As sources 

are identified and control strategies developed, the states 

will modify discharge permits to incorporate appropriate 

load allocations. A continuing challenge to EPA and states is 

to address nonpoint sources of nitrogen deposition to the 

Sound, including atmospheric deposition and groundwater infiltration. These sources contribute many thousands 

of pounds of nitrogen and which are more difficult and 

complex to identify and control. To address these sources, 

the LISS supports local watershed protection programs and 

projects that reduce stormwater runoff, plan for and manage growth, and conserve natural landscapes. 

2.		Reduce the Area and Duration of Hypoxia 

As nitrogen loads to the Sound decrease, reductions in the 

size and duration of the hypoxic area may be anticipated; 

however, ecosystem response is not linear spatially or temporally in some systems. While other factors also affect the 

timing, duration, and severity of hypoxia, including weather 

conditions such as rainfall, solar radiation and light, temperature, and winds, continued reductions in nitrogen loads 

will help to mitigate these uncontrollable natural factors. As 

the states continue implementing STP upgrades for nitrogen and nonpoint source controls, the new applied technologies will reduce nitrogen inputs, limit algal response, and 

intervene in natural cycles of algal growth, its death, decay, 

and resulting loss of dissolved oxygen. 

3.		Restore and Protect Critical Habitats and Reopen 

Rivers to Diadromous Fish 

EPA will continue to work with Management Conference 

partners as they restore and protect critical and degraded 

habitats and reopen rivers and streams to diadromous fish 

passage. The states and EPA will continue to direct efforts at 

the most vulnerable coastal habitats and key areas of high 

ecological value, such as coastal wetlands. The states will 

lead these efforts, using EPA’s and a variety of public and 

private funds, and cooperate with landowners, to construct 

fishways, remove dams, or otherwise mitigate impediments 

to diadromous fish passage. Where feasible and as funding allows, fish counting devices will provide valuable data 

on actual numbers of fish returning to breeding grounds. 

Restoration of the diadromous fishery and increasing the 

higher trophic levels in the Sound are longer-term goals 

of Long Island Sound’s federal and state natural resource 

managers. The states and EPA will continue work to plan 

for, address, and mitigate climate change impacts on coastal 

estuarine environments through the Long Island Sound 

Sentinel Monitors program. Key environmental sentinels of 

ecological change will be identified and tracked to monitor 

changes from baselines. Through this program, managers 

and decision makers will be alerted to potential effects on 

the vital ecological resources at risk or vulnerable to climate 

change, and mitigation options may be developed and 

implemented. 

4.		Implement Through Partnerships 

New York, Connecticut, and EPA will cooperate to agree on 

and assist in implementing a new Long Island Sound Agreement. The Agreement will build upon CCMP goals and targets, which were refined and documented in the predecessor 

Long Island Sound 2003 Agreement. 

The states and EPA will continue to address the highest 

priority environmental and ecological problems identified 

in the CCMP—the impact of hypoxia on the ecosystem, 

including living marine resources; the effects of reducing toxic substances, pathogens, and floatable debris on 

the ambient environment; identification, restoration and 

protection of critical habitats; and managing the populations of living marine and marine-dependent resources that 

rely on the Sound as their primary habitat. The Management Conference will work to improve riparian buffers in 

key river reaches and restore submerged aquatic vegetation 

in key embayments; reduce the impact of toxic substances, 

pathogens, and floatable debris on the ecology; and improve 

the stewardship of these critical areas. 

EPA and the states will continue to support the Citizens 

Advisory Committee and the Science and Technical Advisory Committee, which provide technical expertise and public participation and advice to the Management Conference 

partners in the implementation of the CCMP. An educated 

and informed public will more readily recognize problems 

and understand their role in environmental stewardship. 

National Water Program Guidance 40
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	

 

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect the Puget Sound Basin 

5.	 Core EPA Program Support 

The LISS supports, and is supported by EPA core environmental management and regulatory control programs, as 

well as one of the Administrator’s key priorities – urban 

waters. Long Island Sound itself is known as the “Urban 

Sea,”8

 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. 

For example, EPA and the states use authorities and funding provided under CWA Section 319 to manage watersheds 

that are critical to the health of Long Island Sound. Under 

Section 303(d), state and local TMDLs for harmful substances support the work of the Management Conference in 

ensuring a clean and safe Long Island Sound. 

EPA’s State Revolving Fund under Section 601 is used by 

states to leverage funding for STP upgrades for nitrogen 

control, and NPDES permits issued under Section 402 

provide enforceable targets to monitor progress in reducing 

nitrogen and other harmful pollutants to waters entering 

the Sound. Because of the LISS nitrogen TMDL, developed 

under Section 303(d), both the states of Connecticut and 

New York revised their ambient water quality standards for 

dissolved oxygen (DO) to be consistent with EPA’s national 

guidance for DO in marine waters. With EPA funding 

through the LISS, Connecticut conducts the LIS ambient 

water quality monitoring (WQM) program, and has participated with the State of New York in EPA’s National Coastal 

Assessment monitoring program. The data compiled by the 

LISS WQM program is one of the most robust and extensive datasets on ambient conditions available to scientists, 

researchers, and managers. The LISS nitrogen TMDL sets 

firm reduction targets and encourages trading at point 

sources, and NPDES/SPDES permits have been modified to 

incorporate TMDL nitrogen limits on a 15 year enforceable 

schedule. The states of New York and Connecticut recognize 

the significant financial investments required to support 

wastewater infrastructure and have passed state bond 

act funding to sustain efforts to upgrade STPs to reduce 

nitrogen loads. These actions are primary support of CWA 

core programs, and are ongoing and integral to LISS CCMP 

implementation to restore and protect Long Island Sound, 

the Urban Sea. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

EPA grant resources supporting this goal include the Long 

Island Sound CCMP implementation grants authorized 

under Sections 119(d) and 320(g) of the Clean Water Act 

as amended. These grants include sub grants for the Long 

Island Sound Futures Fund Large and Small grant programs 

administered by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Long Island Sound CCMP Enhancements program 

administered by the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, and the Long Island Sound 

Research Grant program administered by the New York 

and Connecticut Sea Grant programs. The LISS Web page 

provides grant information and progress toward meeting 

environmental results at: (http://longislandsoundstudy. 

net/about/grants/?). 

5. Restore and Protect the Puget 

Sound Basin 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Improve water quality, improve air 

quality, and minimize adverse impacts 

of rapid development in the Puget 

Sound Basin. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Program Strategies 

The Puget Sound Basin is the largest population and commercial center in the Pacific Northwest, supporting a vital 

system of international ports, transportation systems, and 

defense installations. The ecosystem encompasses roughly 

20 rivers and 2,800 square miles of sheltered inland waters 

that provide habitat to hundreds of species of marine mammals, fish, and sea birds. Puget Sound salmon landings average more than 19 million pounds per year and support an 

average of 578,000 sport-fishing trips each year, as well as 

subsistence harvests to many tribal communities. However, 

continued declines in wild salmon and other key species 

indicate that additional watershed protection and restoration efforts are needed to reverse these trends. 

Although Puget Sound currently leads U.S. waterways in 

shellfish production, 30,000 acres of shellfish beds have 

been closed to harvest since 1980. These closures affect local 

economies and cultural and subsistence needs for these 

traditional resources. In addition, excess nutrients have created hypoxic zones that further impair shellfish and finfish 

populations. Recent monitoring assessments indicate that 

marine species in the Puget Sound have high levels of toxic 

contamination. Almost 5,700 acres of submerged land 

(about 9 square miles) are currently classified as contaminated with toxics and another 24,000 as at least partially 

contaminated. Additional pollutants are still being released: 

approximately 1 million pounds of toxics are released into 

8 L.Koppelman, The Urban Sea: Long Island Sound, 1976; ISBN 0-275-28863-8 

National Water Program Guidance 41
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 		

	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect the Puget Sound Basin 

the water, with stormwater identified as a major source, and 

5 million pounds into the air each year, with many of these 

pollutants also finding their way into Puget Sound and its 

food web. 

There is growing recognition that protecting the Puget 

Sound ecosystem would require increased capacity and 

sharper focus. In 2006, a broad partnership of civic leaders, 

scientists, business and environmental representatives, representative agency directors and tribal leadership was asked 

to propose a new state approach to restoring and protecting 

the Puget Sound Basin and its component watersheds. This 

challenge resulted in the creation of the Puget Sound Partnership (Partnership) in 2007, a new state agency, and an 

updated and more integrated comprehensive management 

plan in 2009, the “2020 Action Agenda”, for protecting and 

restoring the Puget Sound ecosystem. 

In 2011 EPA awarded multi-year cooperative agreements to 

competitively-selected entities to act as “lead organizations” 

(LOs) to implement focused efforts to improve conditions 

in the Puget Sound basin within the following areas of 

emphasis: 

• Marine and nearshore protection and restoration; 

• Watershed protection and restoration; 

• Toxics and nutrients prevention, reduction, and control; 

• Pathogen prevention, reduction, and control; 

• Projects in tribal areas; and 

• Outreach and education. 

The Partnership and LOs will be directly involved in much of 

the work outlined below. 

Key program strategies for FY 2012 include: 

1.		Improving Water Quality and Restoring Shellfish Beds 

and Wild Salmon Populations through Local Watershed Protection 

EPA will continue to work with state and local agencies 

and tribal governments to build capacity for protecting 

and restoring local watersheds, particularly in areas where 

shellfish bed closures or harvest area downgrades are occurring or where key salmon recovery efforts are being focused. 

In recent years, FY 2008 – FY 2010, substantial watershed 

protection grants have been awarded to protect and restore 

commercial, subsistence, and recreational shellfish growing 

areas and other awards were made to entities working to 

protect watersheds supporting wild salmon populations. 

2.		Addressing Stormwater Issues through Local 

Watershed Protection Plans 

EPA will work with state and local agencies and the tribes 

using local watershed protection approaches to reduce 

stormwater impacts to local aquatic resources in urbanizing areas currently outside of NPDES Phase I and II permit 

authority. Of particular concern are the sensitive and high 

value estuarine waters such as Hood Canal, the northern 

Straits, and south Puget Sound. 

EPA will also work with the state to increase support to local 

and tribal governments and the development community 

to promote smart growth and low impact development 

approaches in the Puget Sound Basin. In 2010, eight substantial watershed protection or technical study grants were 

awarded to help reduce stormwater impacts and promote 

low impact development approaches. 

Watershed protection and land use integration projects 

continue to be a focus of EPA’s stormwater work and these 

activities are included in actions eligible for funding in EPA’s 

Puget Sound grant programs. This is consistent with supporting the priority actions identified in the Puget Sound 

Action Agenda, which was formally approved by EPA under 

Section 320 of the Clean Water Act in 2009. 

To the extent that we can, EPA will assist with evaluating, 

quantifying, and documenting improvements in local water 

quality and beneficial uses as these local watershed protection and restoration plans are implemented. 

EPA is working with the Partnership and other state agencies to help support development of a comprehensive storm 

water monitoring program for the Puget Sound basin so 

that information gathered can be used to adaptively manage 

the next round of permits and implementation actions. 

3.		Reducing Sources of Toxics and Nutrients 

Priority toxic contaminants from terrestrial, atmospheric, 

and marine discharge sources will be quantified and source 

control actions prioritized and initiated. 

A mass balance model of nutrient sources, reservoirs, 

pathways, and risk to local ecosystems in Puget Sound will 

be refined and specific nutrient reduction strategies will 

be established within priority areas, including both Hood 

Canal and South Puget Sound. 

4.		Restoring and Protecting Nearshore Aquatic Habitats 

EPA will work closely with state and local agencies to 

enhance and leverage their resources to protect and restore 

Puget Sound nearshore habitat. 

Efforts will focus on (1) effective regulation and stewardship, including updating Shoreline Management Plans 

and ensuring their effective implementation; (2) targeting 

capital investments in habitat restoration and protection 

consistent with the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem 

Restoration Partnership and other analyses; and (3) tackling 

high priority threats including invasive species, oil spills, 

and climate change. 

Protection programs, restoration strategies, project lists, 

and outcomes will be evaluated against current conditions 

and ongoing habitat loss to determine net changes in extent 

and function of estuary habitats. 

National Water Program Guidance 42
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Sustain and Restore the U.S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health 

5.		Improving Ecosystem Monitoring and the Application 

of Science 

A new Integrated Science Plan for Puget Sound is being 

developed including enhanced monitoring, modeling, 

assessment and research capacity. The emerging science 

agenda will be focused on improving the effectiveness 

of both local management activities and broader policy 

initiatives. 

EPA is working with a number of stakeholders in the Puget 

Sound National Estuary Program management conference 

through the Puget Sound Partnership to develop a basinwide, coordinated ecosystem monitoring and assessment 

system. 

EPA will work with other science communication initiatives and programs to ensure that data and information is 

more available and relevant to citizens, local jurisdictions, 

watershed management forums, and resource managers. 

EPA awarded a lead organization cooperative agreement to 

the Partnership in FY 2010 to coordinate and implement a 

Puget Sound wide environmental education and outreach 

program that includes regular communication to the public 

of the science, monitoring data, and results of actions taken 

to preserve and restore Puget Sound. 

6.		Ensuring Focused and Productive Transboundary 

Coordination 

EPA Region 10 will continue to work with Environment Canada, Pacific Yukon Region to implement biennial work plans 

developed under the 2000 Joint Statement of Cooperation 

on the Georgia Basin and Puget Sound Ecosystem (“SoC”). 

As in previous years, the EPA-EC chaired SoC working group, 

comprising state, provincial, tribal, and first nations representatives, work toward sharing scientific information on 

the ecosystem, developing joint research initiatives, ensuring 

coordination of environmental management initiatives, and 

jointly considering longer term planning issues including air 

quality and climate change. A significant FY 2011 activity is 

the planning of the biennial Salish Sea Ecosystem Research 

Conference (Vancouver, 2011); in 2009 this transboundary 

conference attracted registration from over 1100 scientists, 

policy makers, and stakeholders. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

EPA grant resources directly supporting this goal are 

provided through the National Estuary Program grants 

under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. In recent years, 

additional Puget Sound grant resources have been made 

available under the “Geographic Program: Puget Sound 

Program Project” appropriation. These appropriations have 

been applied to priority actions aimed at pollution control, 

watershed protection, and the science capacity needed to 

help focus, monitor, and assess the effectiveness of actions. 

A range of other water program grants also support many 

activities that assist in the achievement of this subobjective. These include grants supporting Washington State 

and Tribal water quality programs, and infrastructure loan 

programs. 

D) A Strategic Response to Climate Change 

The Puget Sound Partnership received FY 2010 Climate 

Ready Estuaries funds to incorporate climate change into 

its Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans, 

and also received an additional technical assistance contract 

to develop climate change indicators and climate-sensitive 

habitat restoration guidance. The Puget Sound Partnership’s 

Action Agenda calls for actions to adapt to and mitigate for 

climate change. The Action Agenda recognizes that climate 

change will exacerbate the existing threats to Puget Sound. 

Many of the strategies and actions to protect and restore 

the Puget Sound also serve as mitigation and adaptation 

measures. Both the Puget Sound Partnership and EPA have 

identified climate change impacts to be considered when 

evaluating potential actions. Additionally, the lead organizations (LOs) implementing focused efforts to improve 

conditions in Puget Sound are incorporating climate 

change response and adaptation in their criteria for project 

funding. 

For additional information, please visit: http://www.epa. 

gov/region10/psgb/. 

6. Sustain and Restore the U.S.-

Mexico Border Environmental 

Health 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Sustain and restore the environmental 

health along the U.S.-Mexico Border through the implementation of the Border 2012 Plan. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Strategies 

The United States and Mexico have a long-standing commitment to protect the environment and public health for 

communities in the U.S.-Mexico Border region. The basic 

approach to improving the environment and public health 

in the U.S.-Mexico Border region is the Border 2012 Plan. 

Under this Plan, EPA expects to take the following key 

Actions to improve water quality and protect public health. 

1.	Core Program Implementation: EPA will continue to 

implement core programs under the Clean Water Act 

and related authorities, ranging from discharge permit 

issuance, to watershed restoration, to nonpoint pollution 

control. 

2.	Drinking Water and Wastewater Treatment Financing: 

Federal, state, and local institutions participate in border 

area efforts to improve water quality through the construction of infrastructure and development of pretreatment programs. Specifically, Mexico’s National Water 

Commission (CONAGUA) and EPA provide funding and 

technical assistance for project planning and construction 

of infrastructure. 

National Water Program Guidance 43
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	

 

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Sustain and Restore Pacific Islands Territories 

Congress has provided $990 million in financing for border water infrastructure between 1994 and 2010. In FY 

2012, EPA plans to provide approximately $10 million for 

planning, design, and construction of drinking water and 

wastewater facilities. EPA will continue working with all 

of its partners to leverage available resources to meet priority needs. The FY 2012 targets will be achieved through 

the completion of prioritized Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF) drinking water and wastewater 

infrastructure projects. Future progress in meeting this 

subobjective will be achieved through the completion of 

other border drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects as well as through the collaborative efforts 

established through the Border 2012 Water Task Forces. 

3.	Build Partnerships: 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-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. EPA will continue to support these institutions 

and work collaboratively with CONAGUA. 

4.	Improve Measures of Progress: During FY 2012, EPA 

will work with Mexico, states, tribes, and other institutions to improve measures of progress toward water quality and public health goals. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

A range of program grants are used by states to implement 

core programs in the U.S.-Mexico Border region for waters 

in the U.S. only. Allocations of the funding available for 

infrastructure projects, funded through the Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF), are provided through a 

collaborative and public prioritization process. 

7. Sustain and Restore Pacific Islands 

Territories 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Sustain and restore the environmental 

health of the U.S. Pacific Island Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and 

the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Program Strategies 

The U.S. Pacific island territories of Guam, American Samoa, 

and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 

struggle to provide adequate drinking water and sanitation 

service. For example, the island of Saipan in the Northern 

Marianas, with a population of about 70,000, may be the 

only municipality of its size in the United States without 

24-hour drinking water. When residents of Saipan do get 

water (many receive only a few hours per day of water 

service), it is too salty to drink. In the Pacific Island territories, poor wastewater conveyance and treatment systems 

threaten to contaminate drinking water wells and surface 

waters. Island beaches, with important recreational, economic, and cultural significance, are frequently polluted and 

placed under advisories. 

One of the root causes of drinking water and sanitation 

problems in the U.S. Pacific Island territories is inadequate 

and crumbling infrastructure. Recent studies estimate that 

it would take over one billion dollars in capital investments 

to bring the Pacific territories drinking water and wastewater systems up to U.S. standards. EPA is targeting the use 

of existing grants, enforcement, and technical assistance to 

improve the drinking water and wastewater situation in the 

Pacific Islands. In pursuing these actions, EPA will continue 

to use the available resources and to work with partners 

at both the federal and local levels to seek improvements. 

These efforts will very likely only keep the infrastructure 

and situation from worsening, and will not move the systems up toward U.S. standards. 

•		 Use of Existing Grants: EPA is working in partnership 

with the U.S. Department of the Interior to optimize 

federal grants to improve priority water and wastewater 

systems. EPA grants (historically, about $1.2M per territory annually for water and wastewater combined), plus 

other federal grants have led to some improvements in 

the recent past. However, existing grants fall far short of 

the overall capital needs in the Pacific Islands. 

• Enforcement: EPA will continue to oversee implementation of judicial and administrative orders to improve 

drinking water and wastewater systems. For example, as 

a result of implementation of a 2003 Stipulated Order 

under the federal district court in Guam, wastewater spills 

in Guam in the period of 2005-2008 were down by 99% 

compared to 1999-2002; and no island-wide boil water 

notices have been issued in over four years (through mid2009) compared to nearly every month in 2002. (However, in 2009, several wastewater overflows and boil water 

notices occurred.) In 2009, EPA has entered into a comparable Stipulated Order in the CNMI. EPA will continue to 

assess judicial and administrative enforcement as a tool to 

improve water and wastewater service. 

•		 Technical Assistance: EPA will continue to use technical 

assistance to improve the operation of drinking water and 

wastewater systems in the Pacific Islands. In addition to 

periodic on-site training, EPA will continue to use the IPA 

(Intergovernmental Personnel Act) to build capacity in 

the Islands to protect public health and the environment. 

For example, in recent years, EPA has placed U.S. Public 

Health Service drinking water and wastewater engineers 

in key positions within Pacific island water utilities and 

within local regulatory agencies. 

National Water Program Guidance 44
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	

 

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	

	 

 

 

 

 


 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems �	 Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem 

•		 Guam Military Expansion: EPA will continue to work 

with the Department of Defense in its Guam Military 

Expansion project to improve the environmental infrastructure on Guam. The U.S and Japan have agreed to 

relocate the Marine Base from Okinawa, Japan to Guam. 

By 2014, the relocation could result in approximately 

22,000 additional troops and dependents and upwards of 

80,000 additional people total on Guam (a 40% increase 

in population) while spending $10 - $15 billion on 

construction. This military expansion is an opportunity 

to improve the environmental infrastructure on Guam, 

but significant investment will be required to meet the 

increased strain on the island’s fragile water and wastewater infrastructure. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

A range of grants funds and set-asides from the national 

State Revolving Fund (SRF) appropriations are available to 

implement projects to improve drinking water and wastewater infrastructure in the Pacific islands. EPA has historically 

provided about $4 million total to the Pacific territories in 

drinking water and wastewater grants annually through the 

SRF programs. SRF funding under ARRA provided approximately an additional $4M per territory in infrastructure 

funding in FY 2009. 

The FY 2010 appropriations language increased the SRF 

set-aside for territories to 1.5%, which, along with the significant overall increase in SRF funding, resulted in a nearly 

10-fold increase in infrastructure funding for the Pacific territories, to approximately $37M total in FY 2010. However, 

the 1.5% set-aside for territories is not permanent, and 

funding levels for subsequent years are uncertain. To bring 

drinking water and wastewater service and infrastructure in 

the U.S. Pacific territories up to U.S. standards, significant 

and sustained investment will be required. 

D) A Strategic Response to Climate Change 

EPA’s Pacific Islands Office has been working to address 

climate change and water issues by focusing on three main 

areas in the Pacific Islands: water quality protection and 

improvement; outreach, education and collaboration on 

climate change issues; and sustainable military buildup on 

Guam. Projects include: 

• Promoting water conservation and efficiency at public 

utilities through innovative State Revolving Fund (SRF) 

projects; 

• Following up on the June 2009 Pacific Islands Environment Conference, entitled “Climate of Change: Energizing a Sustainable Future for Pacific Islands.” The conference, which took place on Saipan, CNMI, focused on 

issues including renewable energy and energy efficiency, 

coral reef protection, adaptation strategies for Pacific 

Islands, and improved efficiency for water and wastewater services; and 

• Working with the Department of Defense (DOD) and 

other federal resource agencies to ensure that sustainable 

practices are included in the upcoming military buildup 

on Guam. This includes improving drinking water and 

wastewater compliance with environmental standards, 

utilizing low impact development and green infrastructure for new construction, and minimizing marine habitat disturbance. 

For additional information on EPA’s work in the Pacific 

Islands, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/region09/islands/ 

8. Restore and Protect the South 

Florida Ecosystem 

A) SUBOBJECTIVE 

Protect and restore the South Florida 

ecosystem, including the Everglades 

and coral reef ecosystems. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Program Strategies 

The South Florida ecosystem encompasses three national 

parks, more than ten national wildlife refuges, a national 

preserve and a national marine sanctuary. It is home to 

two Native American nations, and it supports the largest 

wilderness area east of the Mississippi River, the only living 

coral barrier reef adjacent to the United States, and the 

largest commercial and sport fisheries in Florida. But rapid 

population growth is threatening the health of this vital 

ecosystem. South Florida is home to about 8 million people, 

more than the populations of 39 individual states. Another 

2 million people are expected to settle in the area over the 

next 10 to 20 years. Fifty percent of the region’s wetlands 

have been lost to suburban and agricultural development, 

and the altered hydrology and water management throughout the region have had a major impact on the ecosystem. 

EPA is working in partnership with numerous local, 

regional, state, and federal agencies and tribes to ensure 

the long-term sustainability of the region’s varied natural resources while providing for extensive agricultural 

operations and a continually expanding population. EPA’s 

South Florida Geographic Initiative (SFGI) is designed to 

protect and restore communities and ecosystems affected 

by environmental problems. SFGI efforts include activities 

related to the Section 404 wetlands protection program; the 

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program (CERP); 

the Water Quality Protection Program for the Florida Keys 

National Marine Sanctuary; the Southeast Florida Coral 

Reef Initiative, directed by the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force; 

the Brownfields Program; and a number of other waste 

management programs. 

1.	 Accelerate Watershed Protection 

Strong execution of core clean water programs is essential 

but not adequate for accelerating progress toward maintaining and restoring water quality and the associated biological resources in South Florida. Water quality degradation 

is often caused by many different and diffuse sources. To 

National Water Program Guidance 45
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 

 

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect the South Florida Ecosystem 

address the complex causes of water quality impairment, 

we are using an approach grounded in science, innovation, 

stakeholder involvement, and adaptive management – the 

watershed approach. In addition to implementing core clean 

water programs, we will continue to work to: 

• Support and expand local watershed protection efforts 

through innovative approaches to build local capacity; and 

• Initiate or strengthen through direct support watershed 

protection and restoration for critical watersheds and 

water bodies. 

2.	 Conduct Congressionally Mandated Responsibilities 

The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) and 

Protection Act of 1990 directed EPA and the State of Florida, in consultation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to develop a Water Quality 

Protection Program (WQPP) for the Sanctuary. The purpose 

of the WQPP is to recommend priority corrective actions 

and compliance schedules addressing point and nonpoint 

sources of pollution in the Florida Keys ecosystem. In 

addition, the Act also required development of a comprehensive water quality monitoring program and provision of 

opportunities for public participation. In FY 2012, 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. EPA will 

also continue to support implementation of wastewater and 

storm water master plans for the Florida Keys to upgrade 

inadequate wastewater and storm water infrastructure. In 

addition, we will continue to assist with implementing the 

comprehensive plan for eliminating sewage discharges from 

boats and other vessels. 

3.	 Support the Actions of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force 

In October 2002, the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force passed 

a resolution to improve implementation of the National 

Action Plan to Conserve Coral Reefs. Among other things, 

the resolution recommended development of local action 

strategies (LAS) to improve coordinated implementation 

of coral reef conservation. In 2004 and 2005, EPA Region 4 

staff worked with the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative 

(SEFCRI) to develop a LAS for southeast Florida calling for 

reducing “land-based sources of pollution” and increasing 

the awareness and appreciation of coral habitat. Key goals 

of the LAS are: 

• Characterize the existing condition of the coral reef 

ecosystem; 

• Quantify, characterize and prioritize the land-based 

sources of pollution that need to be addressed based on 

identified impacts to the reefs; 

• Identify how pollution affects the southeast Florida coral 

reef habitat; 

• Reduce the impacts of land-based sources of pollution; 

and 

• Work in close cooperation with the awareness and appreciation focus team. 

Detailed action strategies or projects for each goal have 

been developed. For example, one priority action strategy/ 

project is to assimilate existing data to quantify and characterize the sources of pollution and identify the relative 

contributions of point and nonpoint sources. 

4.	 Other Priority Activities for FY 2012 

• Support development of TMDLs for various south Florida 

waters including the watershed for Lake Okeechobee, the 

primary or secondary source of drinking water for large 

portions of south Florida. 

• Continue to work with Florida Department of Environmental Protection in developing numeric water quality 

criteria for Florida water bodies. EPA in accordance with 

a consent decree established numeric nutrient criteria for 

all Florida lakes and flowing waters (except South Florida 

flowing waters) in 2010. EPA is to propose numeric nutrient criteria for all Florida estuaries and coastal waters 

and South Florida flowing waters in 2011 and finalize 

these criteria in 2012. 

• Assist the State of Florida and South Florida Water 

Management District in evaluating the appropriateness 

of aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) technology as a 

key element of the overall restoration strategy for south 

Florida. Region 4 will continue to work with the COE to 

evaluate proposed ASR projects. 

• Continue implementation of the South Florida Wetlands 

Conservation Strategy, including protecting and restoring critical wetland habitats in the face of tremendous 

growth and development. 

• Continue to work closely with the Jacksonville District 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the State of Florida 

to facilitate expedited review of National Environmental 

Policy Act (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 to implement the Everglades Ecosystem Assessment Program, an EMAP-based monitoring program to 

assess the health of the Everglades and the effectiveness 

of ongoing restoration and regulatory strategies, especially those for phosphorus and mercury. 

• Continue to work with the State of Florida, the South 

Florida Water Management District, the Seminole Tribe 

of Florida and Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, 

and federal agencies to implement appropriate phosphorus control programs that will attain water quality 

standards throughout the Everglades. The Seminole Tribe 

and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida both have 

federally approved water quality (WQS) which may differ 

from the State WQS. To insure the identification of the 

appropriate WQS criteria, both tribes should be involved 

National Water Program Guidance 46
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 


 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems Restore and Protect the Columbia River Basin 

in the activities, especially in nutrient control, water quality activities, and development of TMDLs effecting tribal 

waters. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

The South Florida Program Office uses available resources 

to fund priority programs and projects that support the 

restoration and maintenance of the south Florida ecosystem, including the Everglades and coral reef habitat. These 

programs and projects include monitoring (water quality, 

seagrass, and coral reef), special studies, and public education and outreach activities. Federal assistance agreements for projects supporting the activities of the SFGI are 

awarded under the authority of Section 104(b)(3) of the 

CWA. Region 4 issues announcements of opportunity for 

federal funding and “requests for proposals” in accordance 

with EPA Order 5700.5 (Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements). 

9. Restore and Protect the Columbia 

River Basin 

A) SUBOBJECTVE 

Prevent water pollution and improve 

and protect water quality and ecosystems in the Columbia River Basin to 

reduce risks to human health and the environment. 

(Note: Additional measures of progress are identified in 

Appendices A and E.) 

B) Key Program Strategies 

The Columbia River Basin 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. It is vital to the 

more than eight million people who inhabit the area. The 

Columbia River Basin spans two countries, seven states, 

roughly 259,000 square miles. It is our country’s fourth 

largest watershed, containing the largest river input into 

the Pacific Ocean in North and South America and once 

boasted the largest salmon runs in the world. The Columbia 

River Basin is home to many native tribes - high fish consumption and increased exposure to toxics by tribal people 

is a significant environmental justice issue. The Columbia 

River Basin also serves as a unique and special ecosystem, 

home to many important plants and animals. 

Challenges 

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, Couer d’Alene River 

Basin and Lake Roosevelt) and there are growing concerns 

about toxic contamination in fish, aquatic life, and wildlife. 

Based on concern raised by a 1992 EPA national survey of 

contaminants, the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission and EPA conducted two studies. A fish consumption 

survey in 1995 showed tribal members eat 6-11 times more 

fish than the EPA national average; and a fish contamination study in 2002 showed the presence of 92 contaminants 

in fish consumed by tribal members with some levels above 

EPA levels of concern. Recent studies and monitoring programs have found significant levels of toxic chemicals in fish 

and the waters they inhabit, including DDT, PCBs, mercury, 

and emerging contaminants, such as PBDEs. 

In 2005, EPA joined with other partners in 2005 to form 

the Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working Group. The 

Working Group consists of representatives from tribal, 

federal, state, local, and non-profit partners and provides a 

forum to share information and collaborate on toxics reduction. Through the working group, EPA Region 10 is working closely with the states of Oregon, Washington, Idaho, 

Columbia Basin tribal governments, the Lower Columbia 

River Estuary Partnership, local governments, citizen 

groups, industry, and other federal agencies to implement a 

collaborative action plan to assess and reduce toxics in fish 

and water in the Columbia River Basin and to restore and 

protect habitat. 

The Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, one of 

EPA’s National Estuary Programs, also plays a key role in 

addressing toxics and restoration of critical wetlands in the 

Lower Columbia River estuary. Since 1996, EPA has provided significant financial support to the Lower Columbia 

River Estuary Partnership (LCREP). LCREP developed a 

management plan in 1999 that has served as a blueprint for 

estuary recovery efforts. The Lower Columbia River Estuary 

Monitoring Program, developed and overseen by LCREP, is 

critical for better understanding the lower river and estuary, 

including toxics and habitat characterization, essential for 

Columbia River salmon restoration. 

Working with partners including LCREP, and the states of 

Washington and Oregon, EPA has established several goals 

for improving environmental conditions in the Columbia 

River basin by 2014: 

• Clean up 85 acres of known highly contaminated sediments in the Portland Harbor and other sites; and 

• Demonstrate a 10 percent reduction in mean concentration of certain contaminants of concern found in 

water and fish tissue in five sites where baseline data is 

available. 

Future Directions and Accomplishments 

EPA Region 10 is leading the Columbia River Toxics Reduction Strategy, a collaborative effort with many partners, to 

National Water Program Guidance 47
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 

better understand and reduce toxics in the Columbia River 

Basin. Actions include: 

• The Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working Group has 

been convened as a collaborative watershed based group 

consisting of local communities, non-profits, tribal, state, 

and federal government agencies to develop and implement an action plan for reducing toxics in the Columbia 

River Basin. 

• EPA, with the Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working 

Group, completed a Columbia River Basin State of the River 

Report for Toxics, in January 2009. This report provided a 

characterization of the current status and trends of toxics 

pollution and serve as a catalyst for a public dialogue on 

enhancing and accelerating actions to reduce toxics in the 

Columbia River Basin. 

• In September 2010, EPA and the Columbia River Toxics 

Reduction Working Group released the Columbia River 

Basin Toxics Reduction Action Plan. The Action Plan presents 61 actions that can be accomplished over the next 

five years to reduce toxics in the Basin, focusing around 

five initiatives: 

• Increase public understanding and political commitment to toxics reduction; 

• Increase toxic reduction actions; 

• Increase monitoring for source identification and then 

focus attention to reduce toxics; 

• Develop regional, multi-agency monitoring; and 

• Develop a data management system to share toxics 

information around the Basin. 

• EPA is holding workshops around the Basin to engage 

citizens; tribal, local state, and federal governments; 

industry; agriculture; and NGOs on toxics and toxics 

reductions in the Columbia River Basin. Four workshops 

have focused on agricultural successes and technology 

transfer; PCBs; and flame retardants, a growing concern 

in the Columbia River Basin. 

• States and tribes are reducing toxics with regulatory 

tools: Water Quality Standards; water quality improvement plans (total maximum daily loads (TMDLs); 

and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits. 

• Currently EPA is working with the State of Oregon, and 

the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation to collaboratively develop human health criteria that 

will increase protection for Oregon populations who consume high amounts of fish, especially tribal fish consumers, expected to be final in 2011. These criteria will result 

in reduced toxics in point sources, nonpoint sources, 

hazardous waste clean ups, water quality improvement 

plan (TMDL) implementation and other tools and will 

serve as a national and regional model for increased toxics reduction and human health protection. 

• States, tribes, and local partners are improving farming 

practices: 

• Oregon’s Pesticide Stewardship Partnership Program 

in the Walla Walla Basin has shown a 70 percent 

decline in bioaccumulative organophospate pesticides 

in 2006-2008 data. 

• On May 2009, the Washington Department of Health 

lifted the Yakima River DDT fish advisory because of 

the success of collaborative efforts of the agricultural 

community, Washington Ecology, Yakima Indian 

Nation, and others to reduce soil erosion into the 

Yakima River. 

• State and local governments are removing toxics from 

communities, including a Washington State 2007 

PBDE ban; a 2009 Oregon State Deca-BDE ban; and 

mercury reduction strategies by Oregon, Idaho, and 

Nevada, to help communities reduce toxic chemical 

use and ensure proper disposal. 

• Federal and state governments are cleaning up contamination at Portland Harbor, Hanford, Upper Columbia/ 

Lake Roosevelt, Bradford Island, Coeur d’Alene Basin, and 

other sites. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

EPA grant resources directly supporting this goal are limited 

to the National Estuary Program Grants under Section 

320 of the Clean Water Act (approx. $600 K annually in 

recent years) which funds work only in the lower part of the 

Columbia River, which is less than 2% of the Columbia River 

Basin. A range of other water program grants also support 

many activities that assist in the achievement of this subobjective. These include grants supporting Oregon, Idaho, and 

Washington state and tribal water quality programs. 

10. San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 

A) Protect and restore water quality and ecological 

health of the estuary through partnerships, interagency 

coordination, and project grants in the San Francisco 

Bay. 

B) Key Program Strategies 

The San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary (Bay Delta) is the largest estuary on the west coast of North America. Its 4-million acre watershed covers more than 40% of California and 

includes the drainage basins for the Sacramento and San 

Joaquin Rivers, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and the 

San Francisco Bay (including Suisun and San Pablo Bays). 

The Bay Delta is a valuable economic and ecological 

resource. It provides drinking water to 25 million Californians, irrigation to 4.5 million acres of agriculture, and 

hosts important economic resources such as the hub of 

California’s water supply infrastructure, Port of Oakland, 

deep water shipping channels, major highway and railroad corridors, and energy lines. The Bay Delta ecosystem 

supports 750 species of plants, fish, and wildlife including 

National Water Program Guidance 48
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	

		

	 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 

several endangered and threatened aquatic species, such as 

delta smelt, steelhead, spring run Chinook salmon, winter 

run Chinook salmon, and others. Two-thirds of California’s 

salmon pass through Bay Delta waters, and at least half of 

its Pacific Flyway migratory water birds rely on the region’s 

wetlands. 

The Bay Delta Estuary is confronted by a wide range of challenges that are magnified and concentrated in the Delta, the 

heart of California’s water system. Delta resources are in a 

state of crisis. Decades of pollution and resource extraction 

have lead to sharp declines in Bay Delta fisheries contributing to the collapse of California’s salmon fishing industry. 

Multiple years of drought conditions have reduced water 

supply for agriculture and cities contributing to difficult 

economic conditions. Sub-sea level Delta islands are protected only by aging levees, leaving homes, communities, 

farms, transportation corridors, and energy infrastructure 

vulnerable to sea level rise, levee collapse, and flooding. A 

major earthquake would cause a catastrophic failure of the 

levee system jeopardizing lives, cities, and water supplies 

from the Delta to San Diego. 

The federal government has recently re-committed to 

robust engagement on restoring the Bay-Delta ecosystem 

and addressing California’s water needs. In 2009, EPA was 

one of six federal agencies who signed a Memorandum of 

Understanding9

 and produced an Interim Action Plan10 

describing a coordinated set of actions to restore the ecological health of the Bay-Delta ecosystem while providing for a 

high-quality, reliable, sustainable water supply for the State. 

Under the Action Plan, EPA has work underway to address 

critical water quality issues, including assessing the effectiveness of the current regulatory mechanisms to address 

the key water quality issues, developing a comprehensive 

regional water quality monitoring program, and integrating 

climate change into regional water management planning. 

Since FY2008, EPA has administered a competitive grant 

program, the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Improvement Fund (SFBWQIF), to support partnerships that protect and restore San Francisco Bay watersheds as directed by 

congressional appropriations. EPA has prioritized activities 

to protect and restore habitat including riparian corridors, 

floodplains, wetlands, and the Bay; reduce polluted run-off 

from urban development and agriculture; and implement 

TMDLs to restore impaired water quality. To date, EPA 

has awarded $14.7 million, leveraging an additional $11.7 

million and involving nearly 37 partners working on 28 

projects throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. 

In FY 2012, the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary program 

will focus on the following activities: 

• Provide scientific support for Bay-Delta restoration to 

improve the understanding of: 

9 http://www.doi.gov/documents/BayDeltaMOUSigned.pdf 

10 http://www.doi.gov/documents/CAWaterWorkPlan.pdf 

• The causes and methods for reversing the decline of 

pelagic organisms in the Delta; 

• Restoring the health of the San Joaquin River (San 

Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act, Public Law 

111-11); and 

• Pesticide and mercury pollutant loading; 

• Participate in a state/federal partnership to balance the 

competing water needs between agriculture, urban uses, 

and the environment, especially the Agency commitments in the Interim Federal Action Plan of December 

2009; 

• Continue a competitive grant program to implement projects that improve water quality and restore habitat in San 

Francisco Bay watersheds; 

• Strengthen ongoing implementation of the San Francisco Estuary Partnership’s CCMP by supporting a 

new strategic plan. Encourage focus on reducing urban 

runoff impacts on water quality through watershed 

planning, Low Impact Development (LID) and TMDL 

implementation; 

• Support the California Water Boards in implementing 

their Bay Delta Strategic Plan, particularly reviewing/ 

improving water quality standards; 

• Increase effectiveness of regulatory programs to restore 

water quality and to protect wetlands and streams; 

• Continue efforts to support studies that focus on preparing for the effects of climate change; 

• Continue to support restoration of wetlands acreage; and 

• Strengthen monitoring to assist in Clean Water Act 

reporting and TMDL implementation, particularly aimed 

at establishing a San Joaquin Regional Monitoring 

Program. 

For additional information see: http://www.epa.gov/ 

region9/water/watershed/sfbay-delta/index.html. 

C) Grant Program Resources 

Historically, EPA grant resources directly supporting this 

goal have been limited primarily to the National Estuary 

Program grants under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act 

(approx. $600 K annually in recent years). More recently, 

the FY 2008, 2009, and 2010 appropriations bills included 

close to $17 million, collectively, for partnership grants 

to improve San Francisco Bay water quality. Proposals are 

solicited through an open competition, attempting to leverage other funding and targeting the SFBWQIF’s priority 

environmental issues, as follows: reducing polluted run-off 

from urban development and agriculture, implementing 

TMDLs to restore impaired water quality, and protecting 

and restoring habitat including riparian corridors, floodplains, wetlands, and the Bay. There are currently no grant 

National Water Program Guidance 49
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 
 
 

Strategies to Protect Communities and Large Aquatic Ecosystems San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary 

resources which specifically support the water quality issues 

beyond the immediate SF Bay, i.e., in the Delta and its 

tributaries. 

D) A Strategic Response to Climate Change 

Within San Francisco Bay, the San Francisco Estuary Partnership, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), and EPA Global Change Research Program 

completed a pilot project with the Climate Ready Estuaries 

Program to identify key vulnerabilities of the San Francisco 

Bay Delta Estuary to climate change. BCDC is proposing 

new policies for their Bay Plan to better address climate 

change and EPA will work to support adoption of appropriate policies. 

For additional information, please visit 

http://www.sfestuary.org/projects/detail2.php?projectID=4. 

National Water Program Guidance 50
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 
 

National Water Program and Grant Management System 

V. National Water Program and Grant 

Management System �



1. National Water Program 

T

his National Water Program Guidance document describes the general approaches that EPA, in consultation with states 

and tribes, expects to be most effective in attaining the environmental and public health improvements identified in 

the EPA 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. This Guidance, however, is part of a larger, three part management process. 

•		 Part 1: Develop the National Water Program Guidance: 

During the fall of 2010, EPA reviewed program measures 

and made improvements to many measures. The draft 

Guidance was issued in February 2011 and comments 

were due by March 18th. EPA reviewed these comments 

and made changes and clarifications, where appropriate, 

to measures and the text of the Guidance. A summary of 

responses to comments is provided on the Office of Water 

Strategic Plan Web site at (http://www.epa.gov/water/ 

waterplan/). EPA regional offices provided regional targets in mid March. After discussion among headquarters 

and regional offices, national targets for FY 2012 were 

revised to reflect regional input, where applicable. 

•		 Part 2: EPA Region/State/Tribe Consultation/Planning: 

EPA regions will work with states and tribes to develop 

FY 2012 Performance Partnership Agreements or other 

grant workplans, including commitments to reporting 

key activities and, in some cases, commitments to specific 

FY 2012 program accomplishments (May through October of 2011). 

•		 Part 3: Program Evaluation and Adaptive Management: 

The National Water Program will evaluate program progress in 2012 and adapt water program management and 

priorities based on this assessment information. 

Parts 2 and 3 of this program management system are discussed below. Key aspects of water program grant management are also addressed. 

A. EPA Region/State/Tribe Consultation/Planning 

(Step 2) 

1. National Water Program Guidance 

Commitment Process 

EPA regional offices will work with states and tribes beginning in April of 2011 to develop agreements concerning 

program priorities and commitments for FY 2012 in the 

form of Performance Partnership Agreements or individual 

grant workplans. The National Water Program Guidance for 

FY 2012, including program strategies and FY 2012 targets, 

forms a foundation for this effort. 

The National Water Program Guidance for FY 2012 includes 

a minimum number of measures that address the critical 

program activities that are expected to contribute to attainment of long-term goals. Between FYs 2007 and 2008, 

the total number of water measures has been reduced and 

EPA has focused reporting on existing data systems where 

possible. Some of these Program Activity Measures track 

activities carried out by EPA while others address activities 

carried out by states and tribes (see Appendices A and E). In 

addition, some of these measures include annual national 

“targets” while others are intended to simply indicate 

change over time. 

During the spring/summer of 2011, EPA regions will work 

with states and tribes to agree on reporting for all the measures in the FY 2012 Guidance, including both target and 

indicator measures. For the target measures, EPA regional 

offices will develop FY 2012 regional “commitments” based 

on their discussions with states and tribes and using the 

“planning targets” in the FY 2012 Guidance as a point of 

reference. Draft regional “commitments” are due July 8 and, 

after review and comment by National Program Managers, 

EPA regions are to finalize regional commitments by October 

3rd. These final regional “commitments” are then summed to 

make the national commitment, and both the regional and 

national commitments are finalized the Agency’s Annual 

Commitment System (ACS) by October 21, 2011. 

A key part of this process is discussion among EPA regions, 

states, and tribes of regional “commitments” and the development of binding performance partnership agreements or 

other grant workplan documents that establish reporting 

and performance agreements. The goal of this joint effort 

is to allocate available resources to those program activities that are likely to result in the best progress toward 

accomplishing water quality and public health goals for 

that state/tribe (e.g., improved compliance with drinking 

water standards and improved water quality on a watershed 

basis). This process is intended to provide the flexibility for 

EPA regions to adjust their commitments based on relative needs, priorities, and resources of states and tribes in 

the EPA region. Recognizing that rural communities face 

significant challenges in ensuring safe drinking water and 

protecting water quality, the National Water Program will 

focus on addressing rural communities’ needs in discussions with states and work more collaboratively with rural 

communities and rural technical providers in 2012 in planning program activities for FY 2012. The tailored program 

“commitments” that result from this process define, along 

with this Guidance, the “strategy” for the National Water 

Program for FY 2012. 

National Water Program Guidance 51
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

 
 

National Water Program and Grant Management System 

As EPA regional offices work with states and tribes to 

develop FY 2012 commitments, there should also be discussion of initial expectations for progress under key measures 

in FY 2013. The Agency begins developing the FY 2013 budget in the spring of 2011 and is required to provide initial 

estimates of FY 2013 progress for measures included in the 

budget in August of 2011. These estimates can be adjusted 

during the fall before they go into the final FY 2013 President’s budget in January/February 2012. The Office of 

Water will consult with EPA regions in developing the 

initial FY 2013 budget measure targets in August 2011, and 

regions will be better able to comment on proposed initial 

targets if they have had preliminary discussions of FY 2013 

progress with states and tribes. Regions should assume 

stable funding for the purposes of these discussions. 

Final commitments are used as a management internal control to communicate performance expectations to programs 

in regions and headquarters. The accountability to these 

commitments is tracked through annual and interim reporting by responsible programs. HQ and regional managers 

are responsible for translating the measured commitments 

into appropriate tasking for their staffs, reviewing progress 

against these tasks, and accounting for their completion. 

2. State Grant Results and Reporting 

In FY 2012, EPA remains committed to strengthening our 

oversight and reporting of results in state grants, not only 

linking state work plan commitments to EPA’s Strategic 

Plan, but also enhancing transparency and accountability. 

EPA and states will continue working in FY 2012 to achieve 

this through two related efforts: 

State Grant Workplans. The Agency’s long-term goal is for 

EPA and states to achieve greater consistency in workplan 

formats. To achieve that goal, the Office of Grants and 

Debarment (OGD) convened a State/EPA workgroup of 

grant practitioners to identify Essential Elements to be 

included in grant workplans and related grant progress 

reports for the 14 identified state categorical grant programs. On January 24, 2011, OGD issued Grants Policy 

Issuance (GPI) 11-03 State Grant Workplans and Progress 

Reports. The GPI requires that workplans and associated 

progress reports 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. To further transparency, the GPI 

calls for the establishment of an Information Technology 

application to electronically store workplans and progress 

reports. The State /EPA workgroup is currently exploring 

prototypes for the application. 

In consultation with the practitioners workgroup and recognizing that the requirements for the GPI will need to be 

phased in over time to allow regions and states to adjust to 

the new requirements. The GPI will go into effect for awards 

for the 14 identified state categorical grant programs made 

on or after October 1, 2012. The Agency’s goal is to have all 

covered grants awarded on or after October 1, 2012 comply 

with the GPI. Regions and states, however, should begin 

their planning now to transition to the new approach and, 

at a minimum, the GPI should be considered in FY 2012 

workplan negotiations. As the policy is implemented, it will 

be important for National Program Managers and Regional 

Program Offices to provide appropriate outreach, assistance 

and education to state recipients. In addition, OGD will 

work with regions on a case-by-case basis to address any 

implementation challenges. Please contact Jennifer Bogus, 

OARM/OGD, at 202-564-5294 should you have questions 

related to the GPI. 

Measuring Results in State Grant Work Plans and Progress 

Reports: OW program offices and regions should begin 

working with state grant recipients to ensure compliance 

with the new GPI when it becomes effective in FY 2013. 

As the policy is implemented, it will be important for OW 

program offices and regions to provide appropriate outreach, assistance, and education to state grant recipients. In 

addition, OGD will work with the regions on a case-by-case 

basis to address any implementation challenges. 

The current set of measures flagged as State Grant Measures in ACS will be retained for FY 2012 reporting. As in 

FY 2011, the use of the template to capture results for these 

measures is not required. However, reporting on the results 

remains the responsibility of EPA regions and states. 

For FY 2012, regions and states will continue to report 

performance results against the set of state grant measures 

into ACS. For a subset of the measures for which FY 2012 

targets and commitments are established, EPA is asking 

that states and EPA regions provide the Office of Water with 

state specific results data at the end of FY 2012. These measures are associated with some of the larger water program 

grants. The water grant programs and the FY 2012 “State 

Grant” measures supporting the grant are: 

a)	Water Pollution Control State and Interstate Program 

Support (106 Grants). State Grant Measures: WQ-SP10. 

N11; WQ-1a/b/c; WQ-3a; WQ-5; WQ-8b; WQ-14a; WQ15a; WQ-19a. 

b)	Public Water System Supervision (PWSS Grants). State 

Grant Measures: SDW-211; SDW-SP1.N11; SDW-SP4a; 

and SDW-1a. 

c)	State Underground Water Source Protection (UIC 

Grants). State Grant Measures: SDW-7. 

d)	Beach Monitoring and Notification Program Implementation Grants. State Grant Measures: SS-SP9.N11 

and SS-2. 

e)	Nonpoint Source Grants (319 Grants). State Grant Measure: WQ-10. 

National Water Program Guidance 52
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 


 

National Water Program and Grant Management System 

3. Use of the Exchange Network for Reporting Water 

Quality Monitoring Results 

In a July 2009 memorandum, EPA Administrator Jackson 

made enhanced use of the National Environmental Information Exchange Network a part of her strategic vision for the 

Agency. She wrote in response to a unanimous request from 

the Environmental Council of the States emerging from 

their spring 2009 meeting that she intends “the Agency 

to work with the states to set an aggressive timetable for 

completing the transition to the Exchange Network (EN) 

for regulatory and national system reporting”. She directed 

the NPMs to work to achieve the vision of the Network as 

“the preferred way EPA, states, tribes, and others share 

and exchange data.” She added “I look forward to reviewing 

our progress toward achieving this goal”. OW places a high 

priority on increasing the use of the EN for the exchange of 

water related flows. 

Regions working in partnership with the state programs 

should: 

• Increase WQX submissions to at least 46 state submissions during 2011; 

• Increase SDWIS submissions using the EN to 39 states by 

2012; 

• Encourage the use of the exchange network for submitting UIC data by 15 states during 2011; and 

• Increase the use of the eBeaches flow to 15 states by 2011 

and 30 states by 2012. 

4. Grant Guidances 

In addition to this National Water Program Guidance, supporting technical guidance is available in grant-specific 

guidance documents. The grant guidance documents will be 

available by April 2011 in most cases. For most grants, guidance for FY 2011 is being carried forward unchanged to FY 

2012. Grant guidance documents can be found on the Internet at (www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/). More information 

about grant management and reporting requirements is 

provided at the end of this section. 

In FY 2010, the grant guidance for the Water Pollution Control Grants from Section 106 of the Clean Water Act (Section 106 grants) was incorporated into this National Water 

Program Guidance. This was a pilot effort to gain efficiency in 

the issuance of the Section 106 Grant Guidance within the 

National Water Program Guidance. Text boxes with specific 

Section 106 guidance are incorporated within Section III.1. 

B. of this Guidance. Appendix D has additional information 

for states and the interstate agencies. The Tribal Program, 

Monitoring Initiative, and Water Pollution Enforcement 

Activities are not included in this pilot, and grantees should 

follow the specific, separate guidances for these programs. 

In FY 2011, EPA incorporated the grant guidance for the 

Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) and Underground 

Injection Control (UIC) grants within the Water Safe to 

Drink Subobjective to continue to pilot a more streamlined 

approach to issuing the grant guidance. 

5.	 Work Sharing Between EPA and States 

Both EPA and states fulfill critical roles in protecting and 

improving human health and the environment. By law and 

through shared experience, EPA and states must effectively 

collaborate in the planning and implementation of environmental programs, and by ensuring compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements to succeed. 

The current economic challenges facing states are requiring 

the Agency to seriously consider alternate approaches in 

work planning to maintain the current levels of delivery of 

its environmental and public health programs. 

Further, the Administrator has placed renewed emphasis 

on improving the Agency’s relationships with the States 

through the Strategic Plan’s Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy, Strengthening State, Tribal and International 

Partnerships. 

To maintain program performance nationally and to ensure 

the success of the Partnerships Strategy, EPA regional 

offices and their state partners are to expand the utilization of work sharing in developing their FY 2012 program 

performance commitments. Examples and best practices for 

work sharing are included in Appendix F (in electronic copy 

only). 

B) Program Evaluation and Adaptive Management (Step 3) 

As the strategies and programs described in this Guidance are implemented during FY 2012, EPA, states, and 

tribes will evaluate progress toward water goals and work 

to improve program performance by refining strategic 

approaches or adjusting program emphases. 

The National Water Program will evaluate progress using 

four key tools: 

1. National Water Program Mid-Year and End of Year 

Best Practice and Performance Reports 

The Office of Water will prepare a performance report for 

the National Water Program at the mid-point and the end 

of each fiscal year based on data provided by EPA headquarters program offices, EPA regions, states, and tribes. These 

reports will give program managers an integrated analysis 

of progress at the national level and in each EPA region with 

respect to environmental and public health goals identified 

in the Strategic Plan and program activity measures in the 

National Water Program Guidance. 

The reports will include performance highlights, management challenges, and best practices. The Office of Water 

will maintain program performance records and identify 

long-term trends in program performance. In addition, 

the National Water Program Oversight Group will meet at 

mid-year and end of the year to discuss recent performance 

trends and results. 

National Water Program Guidance 53
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	

	 	 	

	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	

 
 

National Water Program and Grant Management System 

2. Senior Management Measures and Quarterly Program 

Update Meetings with the Deputy Administrator 

The Office of Water reports to the Deputy Administrator the 

results on a subset of the National Water Program Guidance 

measures three times per fiscal year. In addition, headquarters and regional senior managers are held accountable for 

a select group of the Guidance measures in their annual 

performance assessments. 

3. HQ/Regional Dialogues 

Each year, the Office of Water will visit three EPA regional 

offices to conduct dialogues on program management 

and performance. These visits will include assessment 

of performance in the EPA regional office and associated 

Large Aquatic Ecosystem programs against objectives and 

subobjectives in the Strategic Plan and annual state/tribal 

Program Activity Measure commitments. 

In addition, a key topic for the HQ/regional dialogues will 

be identification of program innovations or “best practices” 

developed by the EPA region, states, tribes, watershed 

organizations, and others. By highlighting best practices 

identified in HQ/region dialogues, these practices can be 

described in water program performance reports and more 

widely adopted throughout the country. 

4. Program-Specific Evaluations 

In addition to looking at the performance of the National 

Water Program at the national level and performance in 

each EPA regional office, individual water programs will be 

evaluated periodically by EPA and by external parties. 

EPA program evaluations include Office of Water projects 

selected by The Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation’s (OPEI) annual Program Evaluation Competition and 

reviews undertaken by the Evaluation and Accountability 

Team in the Office of Water. Program offices will provide 

continuing oversight and evaluation of state/tribal program implementation in key program areas (e.g., NPDES 

program). 

In addition, the Office of Water expects that external 

parties will evaluate water programs, including projects 

conducted by the EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG), the 

Congressional Government Accountability Office (GAO), 

and projects by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 

Finally, improved program performance requires a commitment to both sustained program evaluation and to 

using program performance information to revise program 

management approaches. Some of the approaches the Office 

of Water will take to improve the linkage between program 

assessment and program management include: 

•	 Communicate Performance Information to Program 

Managers: The Office of Water will use performance 

information to provide mid-year and annual program 

briefings to the Deputy Assistant Administrator and 

senior HQ water program managers. 

•		 Communicate Performance Information to Congress 

and the Public: The Office of Water will use performance 

assessment reports and findings to communicate program progress to other federal agencies, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), the Congress, and the 

public. The Office of Water has established a performance 

page on EPA’s web site to display data on annual and long 

term performance trends. 

•		 Link to Budget and Workforce Plans: The Office of 

Water will use performance assessment information in 

formulation of the annual budget and in development of 

workforce plans. 

•		 Promote Wide Dissemination of Best Practices: The 

Office of Water will actively promote the wide application of best practices and related program management 

innovations identified as part of the End of the Year 

Performance Reports. 

•		 Expand Regional Office Participation in Program 

Assessment: The Office of Water will promote expanded 

involvement of EPA regional offices in program assessments and implementation of the assessment process. 

This effort will include expanded participation of the Lead 

Region in program assessment processes. 

•		 Strengthen Program Performance Assessment in 

Personnel Evaluations: The Office of Water will include 

in EPA staff performance standards specific references 

that link the evaluation of staff, especially the Senior 

Executive Service Corps, to success in improving program 

performance. 

•		 Recognize Successes: In cases where program performance assessments have contributed to improved 

performance in environmental or program activity terms, 

the Office of Water will recognize these successes. By 

explaining and promoting cases of improved program 

performance, the organization builds confidence in the 

assessment process and reinforces the concept that 

improvements are attainable. 

•		 Strengthen Development of Future Strategic Plans and 

National Performance Guidance: The Office of Water 

will use program assessments to improve future strategic 

plans, including revised strategic measures. In addition, 

the Office of Water will use end of the year performance 

results to assist in setting regional and national annual 

commitments for the National Water Program Guidance. 

•		 Promote Effective Grants Management: The Office of 

Water will continue to actively 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 the 

Office of Water that all grants are to comply with applicable grants requirements (described in greater detail in 

the “National Water Program Grants Management for FY 

2012” section), regardless of whether the program specific guidance document addresses the requirement. 

National Water Program Guidance 54
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

	 	 	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

National Water Program and Grant Management System 

• Follow-Up Evaluation for Measure and Program Improvement: The Office of Water may conduct systematic 

assessments of program areas that have consistently 

been unable to meet performance commitments. The 

assessments will focus on characterizing barriers to 

performance and options for program and/or measure 

improvement. 

2. National Water Program Grants Management for 

FY 2012 

The Office of Water 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 National Water Program Guidance. 

A) Policy for Competition of Assistance Agreements 

The Office of Water 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 5700.5A1, 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 the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) standard formatting 

requirements for federal agency announcements of funding 

opportunities and OMB requirements related to Grants.gov 

(http://www.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 December 1, 2006, OGD issued a memorandum describing the approval process for using State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) funds to make non-competitive awards 

to state co-regulator organizations using the co-regulator 

exception in the Competition Order. The memorandum 

states that it is EPA policy to ensure that the head of the 

affected state agency or department (e.g., the State Environmental Commissioner or the head of the state public health 

or agricultural agency) is involved in this approval process. 

Accordingly, effective December 1, 2006, before redirecting STAG funds from a State Continuing Environmental 

Program (CEP) grant allotment for a non-competitive award 

to a state co-regulator organization, EPA must request and 

obtain the consent of the head of the affected state agency 

or department. 

B) Policy on Compliance Review and Monitoring 

The Office of Water 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 Office of the Inspector General. 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. 

C) Performance Standards for Grants Management 

Project officers of assistance agreements participate in a 

wide range of pre-and post-award activities. OGD issued 

Guidance for Assessing Grants Management and the Management of Interagency Agreements under the Performance 

Appraisal and Recognition System (PARS) on September 

30, 2010 to be used for 2010 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 2011 

performance agreements. The Office of Water supports the 

requirement that project officers and their supervisors/ 

National Water Program Guidance 55
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 		

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

National Water Program and Grant Management System 

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. 

National Water Program Guidance 56
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 		

 

 

 

 

 


 

Water Program and Environmental Justice 

VI. Water Program and Environmental Justice 

I

n January 2010, Administrator Jackson made Expanding the Conversation on Environmentalism and Working for Environmental Justice one of EPA’s key priorities. This new priority challenges EPA to address the needs of communities that are 

underrepresented in environmental decision-making and overburdened by environmental pollution. Through this priority, the Office of Water will actively perform community outreach and engage and work with communities to create healthy 

and sustainable communities by decreasing environmental burdens and increasing environmental benefits. 

To further support this priority, environmental justice 

principles must be included in the Agency’s decision making 

processes. The Office of Water supports the Administrator’s EJ priority and the EJ Plan 2014, a four-year plan that 

will help EPA move forward to develop a stronger relationship with communities and increase the Agency’s effort to 

improve the environmental conditions and public health 

in overburdened communities. For more information on 

EJ Plan 2014, see http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/ 

resources/policy/plan-ej-2014.html. The Office of Water 

also supports the Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy: Working for Environmental Justice and Children’s Health established in the FY 2011 – 2015 Strategic Plan. 

To facilitate the continued integration of EJ into its programs, OW will: 

• Provide opportunities to engage communities in the 

National Water Program work and develop improved 

methods of information delivery and technical assistance 

to communities underrepresented in decisions to provide 

clean and safe water; 

• Overcome barriers to incorporating EJ in decision making, including development of regulations and issuing 

permits; 

• Consider approaches for incorporating EJ in setting 

priorities, allocating resources, targeting activities, and 

measuring progress; and 

• Work with the regions and federal agencies to coordinate 

funding and technical support for efforts to build healthy, 

sustainable, and green neighborhoods. 

The Office of Water will make the use of all tools it has at its 

disposa—technical assistance, data, and initiatives, such as 

the Urban Waters Effort, Community Action for a Renewed 

Environment (CARE), and grants—to link with EPA 

regional efforts that address the range of environmental 

issues facing all EJ communities including the community 

based EJ Showcase Community Program. 

During FY 2011 - 2012, OW will work with other EPA 

media offices and EJ stakeholders to address permits issued 

pursuant to federal environmental laws that enable EPA 

to address the complex issue of cumulative impacts from 

exposure to multiple sources and existing conditions that 

are critical to the effective consideration of environmental 

justice in permitting. 

The goal of this effort is to ensure that environmental justice concerns are given full consideration in the decision to 

issue a permit and the terms of permits issued under federal 

environmental laws. An additional goal is to develop tools to 

support the consideration of environmental justice during 

implementation of permitting programs. 

1.		Environmental Justice in the EPA National 

Water Program 

The Office of Water places emphasis on achieving results 

in areas with potential environmental justice concerns 

through Water Safe to Drink (Sub-objective 2.1.1) and Fish 

and Shellfish Safe to Eat (Sub-objective 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 Villages 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. The Office of Water 

will explore ways to collaborate with the Office of Environmental Justice and other EPA offices on how to best develop 

climate change adaptation policies and strategies that pay 

closer attention to vulnerable populations. 

In order to advance environmental quality for communities 

with EJ concerns, the Office of Water will address the EJ 

considerations in drinking water and wastewater infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged communities. The Office of Water will address the lack of access to 

safe drinking water and sanitation systems in small disadvantaged communities, including tribal and territorial 

communities, as well as reduce the risk to exposure in contaminants in fish. The Office of Water also places emphasis 

on Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) 

communities/projects that assess and address sources of 

water pollution. The Office of Water will continue serving 

as the lead for CARE which rotates leadership among EPA’s 

four media programs every two years. Finally, the Office of 

Water places emphasis on helping communities -- especially 

disadvantaged communities -- to access, restore and benefit 

their urban waters through the Urban Waters Effort. 

National Water Program Guidance 57
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 		

	 	

 

 

 


 

Water Program and Environmental Justice 

2. Environmental Justice and Water Safe to Drink 

The Office of Water will promote infrastructure improvements to small and disadvantaged communities through the 

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) that reduce 

public exposure to contaminants through compliance 

with regulations and support the reliable delivery of safe 

water by community water systems, schools, and child-care 

centers. 

To maintain and improve water quality in rural America, 

EPA will continue its efforts to promote better management 

of water utilities through support of state capacity development and operator certification programs, and through 

initiatives on asset management, operator recruitment and 

retention, and water efficiency. This also includes partnership efforts with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural 

Development to enhance the sustainability of rural water 

systems and to promote a sustainable and green water sector workforce. 

EPA will continue to encourage states to refer drinking 

water systems to third party assistance providers, when 

needed. Third party assistance is provided through existing 

contractual agreements or by other state, federal, or nonprofit entities. 

On October 10, 2007, EPA published the latest changes to 

the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) which included significant 

improvements to the Public Education (PE) requirements. 

Drinking water systems must conduct PE when they have a 

lead action level exceedance. EPA made significant modifications to the content of the written public education 

materials (message content) and added a new set of delivery 

requirements. These revisions are intended to better ensure 

that at risk and under represented populations receive 

information quickly and are able to act to reduce their 

exposure. 

3. Drinking Water in Indian Country 

The challenges associated with the provision of safe drinking water in Indian Country are similar to challenges facing 

other small communities: a lack of financial, technical, 

and managerial 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 (SDW-SP3.N11) and by the 

number of homes that lack access to safe drinking water 

in Indian country (SDW-SP5). Similarly, the magnitude of 

challenges associated with provision of sanitation is demonstrated by the number of homes that lack access to basic 

sanitation in Indian Country (WQ-SP15). 

• In 2010, 13.2% of the population in Indian country was 

served by community water systems in violation of EPA’s 

health-based drinking water standards. In comparison; 

7.9% of the entire U.S. population was served by community water systems in violation of these regulations. 

• Additionally, 34,187 or 12.1% of the tribal homes tracked 

by the Indian Health Service were found to lack access to 

safe drinking water and/or wastewater disposal facilities in 2009. This compares with the 0.6% of non-native 

homes in the United States that lack such infrastructure, 

as measured in 2005 by the U.S. Census Bureau. 

The EPA National Tribal Drinking Water Program will continue to maintain its commitment to improve the provision 

of safe drinking water in Indian country by working with 

public water systems to maintain and improve compliance 

with the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations 

through use of infrastructure funding, technical assistance, 

and enforcement actions. This effort supports the CrossCutting Fundamental Strategy: Working for Environmental 

Justice and Children’s Health to highlight EJ supporting 

work. EPA recognizes that not all tribal communities are 

disproportionately burdened by environmental hazards, 

and thus, do not present a universal need for environmental 

justice. However, the above measure (SDW-SP3.N11) indicates that a greater proportion of the overall population in 

Indian Country lacks access to 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. Therefore, an increase in the percent population receiving safe drinking water is indicative of an overall 

increase in public health protection in Indian Country. 

The EPA will also continue to work in partnership with the 

Indian Health Service, the Department of Agriculture, and 

Housing and Urban Development through the Infrastructure Task Force (ITF) to increase access to safe water. The 

ITF is tasked with enhancing the coordination of federal 

tribal infrastructure funding and generating ways to 

improve and support tribal utility management in an effort 

to increase and maintain access to safe drinking water in 

Indian country. 

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. 

4.		Environmental Justice and Fish and Shellfish 

Safe to Eat 

The Office of Water promotes contaminant monitoring, as 

well as risk communication to minority populations who 

may consume large amounts of fish and shellfish taken 

from polluted waters. Integration of public health advisory activities into the Water Quality Standards Program 

promotes environmental justice by ensuring that advisories and minority population health risks are known when 

states make water quality standards attainment decisions, 

develop Total Maximum Daily Loads for impaired waters, 

and develop permits to control sources of pollution. 

The Office of Water 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 

National Water Program Guidance 58
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 		

	 	 	 	 	

	 	

 
 

Water Program and Environmental Justice 

populations may include women of child bearing age, children, African Americans, Asian Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, 

Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives. 

The Office of Water reaches these populations by disseminating information in multiple languages to doctors, nurses, 

nurse practitioners, and midwives about reducing the risks 

of exposure to contaminants in fish and shellfish. The 

Office of Water maintains the National Fish Advisory Web 

site that includes the National Listing of Fish Advisories 

(includes both fish and shellfish advisories) and provides 

advice to health professionals and the public on preparing 

fish caught for recreation and subsistence. 

5.		Environmental Justice and the U.S.-Mexico 

Border Region 

The United States and Mexico have a long-standing commitment to protect the environment and public health for 

communities in the U.S.-Mexico border region. Residents of 

the border region face disproportionate exposure to inadequately treated wastewater and unsafe drinking water. EPA’s 

U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program enables 

communities in the border region, defined as 100 kilometers north and south of the international border, to develop, 

design, and construct infrastructure projects that provide 

safe drinking water and wastewater collection and treatment. The lack of safe drinking water directly impacts public 

health while inadequate sanitation and treatment facilities impact shared and transboundary rivers and coastal 

waters and threaten the public health and ecosystems of 

the region. EPA prioritizes funding to border communities 

based on the most severe public health and environmental 

conditions. These communities are looking to EPA as a lastresort funding source when utilities, cities, or states are not 

able to fully finance needed infrastructure improvements. 

Through the U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program, 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. The 

household connections are reported when infrastructure 

projects have completed construction and are operational. 

6. Environmental Justice and Alaska Native Villages 

Alaska Native Villages (ANVs) are unique populations that 

have extreme sanitation difficulties relative to people in 

the lower 48 States. Limited federal and state funding was 

provided to address these problems, but under the 1996 

Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, Congress 

formally recognized an annual appropriation that EPA 

may distribute specifically to these communities. The ANV 

Program addresses the lack of basic drinking water and 

sanitation infrastructure (i.e., flushing toilets and running 

water) in rural and Native Alaska communities. In many 

of these communities, “honeybuckets” and pit privies are 

the sole means of sewage collection and disposal. Drinking 

water is often hauled in 50-gallon tanks from community 

watering points. 

Since 1995 the ANV program, through the state of Alaska, 

has provided grant funds to over 200 under-served communities to improve or to construct drinking water and wastewater facilities thereby improving local health and sanitation conditions. The ANV program also supports training 

and technical assistance programs related to the technical, 

financial, and managerial requirements of managing sanitation systems in rural Alaska. 

Measure WQ-23 tracks the percentage of serviceable rural 

Alaska homes with access to safe drinking water supply 

and wastewater disposal. The number of homes served by 

a community water and wastewater system has increased 

dramatically from 60% in 1998 to 90% in 2008. When 

compared to the national average, ANVs continue to stand 

out as under-served populations for both clean water infrastructure and wastewater treatment. Consequently, these 

villages experience disproportional exposure to untreated or 

under-treated wastewater. 

7. Environmental Justice Water-Related Elements 

The Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) 

program is a community-based, multi-media collaborative Agency program designed to help local communities 

address the cumulative risk of pollutant exposure. Through 

the CARE program, EPA programs work together to provide 

technical and financial assistance to communities. CARE 

assistance agreements create and strengthen local partnerships, local capacity, and civic engagement to improve local 

environments and health, and to ensure sustainability of 

environmental health efforts over time. Technical support 

and training help communities build partnerships and use 

collaborative processes to improve their understanding of 

environmental risks from all sources, set priorities, and 

select and implement actions to reduce risks. 

CARE helps communities choose from the range of EPA 

programs designed to address community concerns and 

improve their effectiveness by working to integrate the 

programs to better meet the needs of communities. The 

CARE program coordinates with a broad range of governments, organizations and businesses to help communities 

find partners they will need to succeed. In addition, CARE 

makes best practices, lessons learned and other tools accessible to all communities. CARE benefits many communities, 

the majority of which are experiencing disproportionate 

adverse health and environmental impacts. 

The Office of Water will work with CARE communities/projects to assess and address sources of water pollution, including the use of water pollution reduction programs in their 

communities, particularly those communities suffering 

disproportionately from environmental burdens. The CARE 

Program will continue to promote cross-media collaboration across the Agency. Regions will use cross-media teams 

to manage and implement CARE cooperative agreements 

in order to protect human health and protect and restore 

National Water Program Guidance 59
 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	 	 	 		

 

 

 


 

Water Program and Environmental Justice 

the environment at the local level. Regions also will identify 

experienced project officers/leaders for each of the CARE 

projects and provide training and support as needed. In FY 

2012, the lead coordination NPM for the CARE Program is 

OW, with OAR as co-lead. OCSPP and OSWER principals 

and staff continue to actively participate in this crossAgency program, as do OEJ and OCHP. The CARE Program 

and regions will ensure required reporting of progress and 

results in Quarterly and End of Year Reports and other 

efforts to aggregate program results on a national level. To 

capture some of the program successes, the CARE program 

has two new indicator measures that will be tracked and 

reported under the Office of Air’s National Program Guidance. The indicator measures are: 

• Number and percent of communities who have developed 

and agreed on a list of priority toxic and environmental 

concerns using the CARE partnership process (annual 

and cumulative) 

• Number and percent of communities who, through the 

CARE Program, implement local solutions to address 

an agreed upon list of priority toxic and environmental 

concerns using the CARE partnership process (annual 

and cumulative) 

More program information is available at www.epa.gov/ 

CARE. 

In addressing the challenges of climate change, it is important to recognize that the impacts of climate change raise 

serious environmental justice issues. It is generally understood that the extent and nature of climate change impacts 

on populations will vary by region, the relative vulnerability 

of population groups, and society’s ability to adapt to or 

cope with climate change. 

As emphasized in the Technical Support Document accompanying the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean 

Air Act, “within settlements experiencing climate change, 

certain parts of the population may be especially vulnerable; 

these include the poor, the elderly, those already in poor 

health, the disabled, those living alone...and/or indigenous 

populations.” The Office of Water will work with program 

offices in EPA to address the issues facing EJ communities 

regarding climate change 

8.		Achieving Results in the Environmental 

Justice Priorities 

The Office of Water will track these activities through Goal 

2, Protecting America’s Waters, and is reviewing existing 

measures, as part of the Action Plan for the Cross-Cutting 

Fundamental Strategy: Working for Environmental Justice and 

Children’s Health, to identify opportunities to highlight EJ 

work in the National Water Program. Measures (safe drinking water and sanitation on tribal lands, the U.S.-Mexico 

border region, and Alaska native villages) supporting EJ 

work are discussed in previous subsections. 

National Water Program Guidance 60
 Fiscal Year 2012 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

NationalNational Water Program and Children’s Healths Health 

VII. Water Program and Children’s Health �



I

t is important that children’s environmental health be an intrinsic part of decision-making at every level of the Agency. 

EPA must build on existing activities and accomplishments so that children’s health protection is not just a consideration in Agency decision-making, but a driving force in decisions. EPA must use a variety of approaches to protect children from environmental health hazards, including regulation, implementation of community-based programs, research, 

and outreach. At the same time, EPA must periodically evaluate performance to ensure that progress is being made towards 

this goal. 

EPA regions, states, and tribes should identify and assess 

environmental health risks that may disproportionately 

affect children throughout their life stages, including fetal 

development, infancy, childhood, and adolescence. Regional 

programs must ensure that policies, programs, activities, 

and standards address disproportionate risks to children. 

Each region supports a Children’s Health Coordinator who 

serves as a resource within the region to assist offices and 

divisions with children’s environmental health programs 

and planning. The regional Children’s Health Coordinator is 

also a liaison between the region and the Office of Children’s Health Protection and Environmental Education at 

headquarters. 

Actions that regions can take in FY 2012 to expand efforts 

to protect children’s environmental health include: 

• Reviewing existing ACS measures that are specific to or 

refer to children’s health to determine if they can better 

report outcomes and results in children’s environmental 

health for inclusion in future planning and reporting; 

• Formulating discussions and agenda topics on children’s 

health outcomes for EPA programs in national meetings, 

such as division directors meetings; 

• Implementing the Agency’s Children’s Environmental 

Health Guidance for Human Health Risk Assessments 

(http://epa.gov/risk/guidance.htm); 

• Sponsoring joint meetings with counterparts in state 

environmental departments and health departments to 

facilitate coordinated actions to better protect children’s 

environmental health; and 

• Developing region-wide strategies to focus on addressing 

critical children’s health issues within each region. 

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 2012 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. Similar to other small systems, schools and 

child care centers often do not have the technical, managerial, or financial capacity to comply with Safe Drinking 

Water Act requirements, including maintaining a certified 

operator. EPA will continue to provide technical assistance, 

user-friendly guidance, and training to ensure that these 

systems understand their responsibilities for providing safe 

drinking water. EPA will also continue to work with state 

partners to ensure that violations occurring at schools and 

child care centers are addressed quickly and these systems 

are returned to compliance. The National Water Program 

has developed a separate indicator (SDW-17) for schools 

and child care centers meeting health-based standards in 

order to track progress in this area. 

National Water Program Guidance National Water Program Guidance 61
 Fiscal Year 2012 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 

 

 

 


 

National Water Program and the Urban Waters Effort 

VIII. National Water Program and the Urban 

Waters Effort 

Urban environments, particularly in underserved communities, are dominated by impervious surfaces, industrial 

facilities, and abandoned or vacant, often contaminated lands. These characteristics, in combination with insufficient 

storm water infrastructure, generate excess runoff that transports garbage, fertilizers, pesticides, and hazardous 

wastes into the local bodies of water and contribute to combined sewer overflows. In addition, pollution may be introduced 

to local water bodies from any existing operating facilities. Years of contamination create legacy pollutant issues, public 

and environmental health hazards, and cases of environmental injustice. Urban populations are often denied access to the 

water and do not reap the potential economic, social, and environmental benefits of the resource. Furthermore, historic 

urban patterns of development often isolate communities from their waters. 

In March 2009, in response to a charge from EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, EPA’s Office of Water, Office of Solid 

Waste and Emergency Response, and Office of Environmental Justice began to develop a new Urban Waters effort to 

address these issues. This effort supports the Administrator’s priority, Protecting America’s Waters. 

The goal of the Urban Waters effort 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. 

In April and May 2009, during outreach to those working in 

and with urban communities, EPA heard from organizations 

and individuals who have successfully mobilized to address 

these issues. These stakeholders indicated that important 

factors in that success were: engagement of nearby residents, especially youth; robust partnerships; strong community-based organizations; active and informed local government officials; effective education and communication; 

economic incentives; and early, visible victories that fueled 

sustained action. It was also clear from these sessions, that 

stakeholders want federal agencies to better coordinate 

their support to communities and that they are seeking 

technical assistance and information to assist them in making more informed choices and in influencing local decisions 

about their waters and the surrounding land. 

In response to key stakeholder feedback, EPA will join with 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Interior to lead a federal interagency working group to improve 

communities’ access to resources relevant to urban water 

restoration; convene national and regional forums with 

state, tribal and local agencies, centers of learning, private 

sector and non-governmental organizations; and coordinate 

support to on-the-ground projects. EPA will develop new 

Web 2.0 tools for community-to-community knowledge 

sharing; conduct outreach to non-digital audiences; and provide technical assistance to support communities in being 

informed participants in local decision-making. 

State, tribal, and local government agencies are encouraged 

to build on their existing partnerships and develop new 

partnerships with non-profits, private sector, academia and 

community groups, especially those addressing environmental justice to undertake activities that: 

• Promote equitable and safe public access to urban waterways and equitable development of waterfronts; 

• Improve the appearance, odor, health, and quality of the 

water for uses including recreation, fishing, swimming 

and drinking water sources; and 

• Improve the perception of the potential value of these 

waters and encourage community involvement in their 

restoration and improvement by reframing water as 

relevant to community priorities, such as education, 

employment, recreation, safety, health, housing, transportation, and livability. 

Areas of activity may include green infrastructure, source 

water protection, water sector workforce development, 

watershed planning, land revitalization, monitoring and 

assessment, fish advisories, and beach monitoring and 

notification. EPA’s current work in the Chesapeake Bay, 

Great Lakes, National Estuary Program, and Large Aquatic 

Ecosystem programs may offer additional place-based 

opportunities to engage urban communities. 

The FY 2012 President’s Budget proposes funding to 

support Urban Waters grants for community projects to 

address water quality issues. These activities would be 

reflected in two new measures: 1) WQ-25a: Number of 

urban water projects initiated addressing water quality 

issues in the community, and 2) WQ-25b: Number of urban 

water projects completed addressing water quality issues 

in the community. If funding is approved, grant recipients 

would be required to report results corresponding to these 

measures. 

National Water Program Guidance National Water Program Guidance 62
 Fiscal Year 2012 Fiscal Year 2012 
	 	

	 	

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

National Water Program and Climate Change 

IX. National Water Program and Climate Change 

T

he EPA Office Water released the National Water Program Strategy: Response to Climate Change (Strategy) in September 2008. The Strategy describes the impacts of climate change (e.g. warming water temperatures, changes in rainfall 

amounts and intensity, and sea level rise) and their implications for EPA’s clean water and drinking water programs. 

For more information, visit http://water.epa.gov/scitech/climatechange/strategy.cfm. 

Forty-four specific “key actions,” identified in the Strategy, lay the foundation for adapting water programs to a 

changing climate. Most of these actions address building 

resilience to climate change impacts, while others address 

opportunities for mitigating release of greenhouse gases, 

improving research on climate change and water issues, and 

facilitating education about climate change challenges. 

Highlights of Climate Change Activities in the 

National Water Program 

• Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: Water programs at EPA 

have been working to help control greenhouse gas emissions by focusing on improving energy efficiency at 

drinking water and wastewater utilities, reducing water 

use through the WaterSense program, and reducing 

urban heat islands through the Green Infrastructure and 

Green Buildings programs. In addition in 2010, the EPA 

Underground Injection Control Program finalized a rule 

to protect groundwater supplies that could be affected by 

geological sequestration of carbon dioxide. 

• Resiliency: To improve resilience and readiness to adapt 

to the impacts of climate change, the EPA Office of Water 

and the EPA Office of Air and Radiation have worked 

together to develop the Climate Ready Estuaries program. 

The National Water Program also formed a working group 

under the National Drinking Water Advisory Council 

FACA to evaluate the concept of “Climate Ready Water 

Utilities”. This group provided findings and recommendations on the development of an effective program that 

will enable drinking water and wastewater utilities to 

develop and implement long-range plans that account for 

climate change impacts. 

• Water Program Adaptation: Climate change adaptation 

and mitigation is being incorporated throughout the 

National Water Program’s base programs as information becomes available and resources allow. For example, 

guidance has been issued clarifying the use of the State 

Revolving Funds for climate change mitigation and adaptation related activities: water infrastructure programs 

are adopting methods to reduce risk to investments; 

green infrastructure strategies are being promoted to 

manage stormwater flows while preserving water in 

watersheds; the National Estuary Program is incorporating climate resilient strategies; and watershed-based programs are incorporating climate change risks in strategies 

to build watershed resilience. Further, the regional water 

programs are implementing projects to address regional 

priorities, mitigate greenhouse gases, and build resilience. 

• Collaboration: Addressing climate change requires collaborative problem solving, and the NWP has engaged 

partners and stakeholders throughout the federal government, in states, tribes and localities, and with other 

EPA offices. For example, the Office of Water Deputy 

Assistant Administrator co-chairs the Water Workgroup 

of Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, 

comprising over a dozen federal agencies involved in 

water resource management in the U.S. The Interagency 

Workgroup has developed a set of recommendations for 

federal agencies to work together to respond to climate 

change challenges and continues to work together to 

implement strategies. 

Next Steps 

The National Water Program will continue to build a 

resilient program. In 2011, the program will continue to 

work with stakeholders and partners to build our collective 

ability to plan and implement strategies. Notably, the NWP 

Climate Workgroup will revise its Strategy for 2012 and 

beyond, building on the foundation, the lessons learned, 

and the partnerships built during the past few years of 

addressing climate change. Efforts in 2011 include: 

• Continue to implement the updated key actions; 

• Revise and update the Strategy by 2012 with long-term 

goals and mid-term strategies to guide annual planning, including both headquarters and regional water 

programs; 

• Work with states, tribes, and other stakeholders to 

enhance communication and collaboration and build 

new programs, such as Climate Ready Water Utilities to 

address adaptation challenges; 

• Continue to co-chair the Water Workgroup of the Interagency Adaptation Task Force, and work with other federal agencies involved in water management to address 

priority projects, such as water use efficiency and improving data and information for planning; 

• Continue developing integrated water and climate change 

research programs among EPA, other federal agencies, 

water research foundations, and other interested parties; 

and 

National Water Program Guidance 63
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 

 


 

National Water Program and Climate Change 

• Continue to reach out to water program managers, relevant partners and stakeholders, and the public to build 

awareness, increase knowledge, and share lessons learned 

to expand the national capacity to address climate 

change. 

Water managers are encouraged to evaluate opportunities 

to address climate change within their own water programs 

by identifying ways to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions 

and to adapt to long-term vulnerabilities. Climate change 

adds additional reasons to evaluate options to conserve 

water, reduce energy use, adopt green infrastructure and 

watershed-based practices, and improve the resilience of 

watersheds and estuaries. Over the next several years, more 

tools and information will be developed to support planners and decision makers as they address this important 

challenge. 

National Water Program Guidance 64
 Fiscal Year 2012 
 
 

National Water Program and Tribes 

X.National Water Program and Tribes 

EPA is committed to strengthening human and environmental health in Indian country. As outlined in the EPA 2011-

2015 Strategic Plan, the agency will continue to engage with tribes to build effective and results-oriented environmental programs. EPA continues to provide federally-recognized tribes with opportunities to develop tribal capacity to 

ensure that programs implemented by tribes or by EPA are protective of public health and the environment. EPA’s National 

Water Program recognizes that as sovereign entities, and environmental co-regulators, Indian tribes are responsible for 

protecting thousands of square miles of rivers, streams, and lakes, as well as ground water. In addition, tribes living on or 

near the coast are largely dependent on coastal resources. 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. 

Each tribe faces a variety of challenges in protecting these 

resources and ensuring the health of their communities. To 

support and enhance tribal efforts in FY 2012, the Office 

of Water is taking actions in its programs to promote tribal 

participation and program development to protect water 

resources. These actions are described throughout this guidance, and include helping tribes to: develop and implement 

water quality programs under the Final Guidance on Awards 

of Grants to Indian tribes under Section 106 of the Clean 

Water Act; restore and improve water quality on a watershed basis through watershed-based plans and monitoring; 

conduct source water protection assessments; and improve 

implementing core elements of a wetlands program or wetlands monitoring strategy. In addition, in FY 2012, EPA will 

host the first national tribal water quality work shop. This 

workshop will bring together tribal water quality professionals for information exchange and capacity building. Further, to reduce the number of tribal homes lacking access 

to safe drinking water and basic sanitation, which remains 

high relative to the national average, the National Water 

Program is working with other federal agencies to ensure 

that federal infrastructure investments are integrated and 

planned to provide long-term sustainable solutions for safe 

drinking water and basic sanitation on tribal lands. The 

Office of Water will continue to support the National Tribal 

Water Council (NTWC) to promote information exchange, 

sharing of best management practices, and analysis of 

high-priority water-related issues and actions 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 on issues related to ground, surface and 

drinking water quality. 

The National Water Program will continue to evaluate 

progress on actions in Indian country that support goals 

described in the EPA Strategic Plan. EPA will evaluate progress using the National Water Program measures, including a set of measures directly supporting tribes, which 

are highlighted here and further described in Appendix A 

and E. In addition, the Administrator has placed renewed 

emphasis on improving the Agency’s relationships with 

tribes through the Strategic Plan’s Cross-Cutting Fundamental Strategy: Strengthening State, Tribal and International 

Partnerships. 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 Health (see 

VI. Water Program and Environmental Justice in this Guidance). Throughout 2006 – 2010, EPA worked with states and 

tribes to align and streamline performance measures. The 

National Water Program will continue to engage states and 

tribes in the Agency’s performance measurement improvement efforts. 

Summary of FY 2012 National Water Program Guidance 

Measures Supporting Tribes 

Water Safe to Drink 

SDW-SP3.N11 

SDW-SP5 

SDW-18.N11 

SDW-01b 

Improved Water Quality on a Watershed Basis 

WQ-SP14a.N11 

WQ-SP14b.N11 

WQ-SP15 

WQ-02 

WQ-03b 

WQ-06a 

WQ-06b 

WQ-12b 

WQ-19b 

WQ-23 

WQ-24.N11 

Increase Wetlands 

WT-SP22 

WT-02a 

National Water Program Guidance National Water Program Guidance 65
 Fiscal Year 2012 Fiscal Year 2012