A NEWSLETTER FOR THE CLEAN WATER AND DRINKING WATER SRF PROGRAMS

ON THE NATIONAL SCENE

From the Hill

In recent months, Capitol Hill has shown particular interest in the Clean Water and Drinking

Water State Revolving Funds. Last summer, Congress requested a public forum to discuss

the effectiveness of federal water quality funding programs. This summer, Congress may

enact a new law reauthorizing the CWSRF and DWSRF programs.

In House Report 107–159 (July 2001), the Committee on Appropriations requested

that EPA host a forum to consider how the federal government should strike a balance

between program flexibility and environmental return on federal investments. In response

to this request, EPA hosted a two-day workshop on March 14–15 entitled “Paying for Water

Quality: Managing Funding Programs to Achieve the Greatest Environmental Benefit.”

Nearly 120 people attended this workshop, including representatives of federal agencies,

state agencies, municipalities, nonprofit organizations, associations, private sector companies,

and congressional committees. The workshop addressed the questions posed by Congress

through a combination of expert speaker panels, question and answer sessions, and open

discussion periods. This fall, EPA will submit a Report to Congress that considers these

issues and provides an overview of the discussion at the workshop.

In 2002, Congress has introduced legislation that would reauthorize the Clean Water State

Revolving Fund, authorize increased levels of funding for both the Clean Water State Revolving

Fund and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, and amend many of the programs’

requirements. The following are some of the most significant changes proposed in either the

Water Investment Act (S. 1961) or the Water Quality Financing Act of 2002 (H.R. 3930):

• $20 billion authorized for the CWSRF program

• $15 billion authorized for the DWSRF program

• $5 billion authorized for grant program to help small communities meet new arsenic limit

• Wet weather (CSO/SSO) grant program reauthorized (program authorized last year but

never funded)

• Federal Davis-Bacon prevailing wage law applied to DWSRF program, reapplied to CWSRF

program

CONTINUED ON PAGE 2
2

ON THE NATIONAL SCENE from page 1

• CWSRF allotment formula changed to better reflect Clean

Water Needs Survey estimates

• State CWSRF programs permitted to offer extended

repayment periods, forgiveness of loan principal, and

negative interest rate loans

• State CWSRF programs required to integrate their priority

ranking systems

• The Senate Bill would also require CWSRF and DWSRF

recipients of assistance to meet several conditions as a

requirement of funding, including the development of asset

management plans and adequate rate structures.

As this issue of SRF’s Up goes to press, both House and

Senate bills have moved through committee. To learn about

their status, visit http://thomas.loc.gov and enter bill number

S.1961 or H.R.3930.

Addressing the Challenge of the Arsenic Rule

In January 2001, EPA released a revised public health

protection standard for arsenic in drinking water lowering the

Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of arsenic in drinking

water from 50 parts per billion to 10 parts per billion. The

new 10 ppb arsenic MCL becomes enforceable on January 23,

2006 for community water systems (CWSs) and nontransient

noncommunity water systems (NTNCWSs). EPA projects that

3,000 CWSs and 1,100 NTNCWSs will need to take measures

to lower arsenic in their drinking water. More than 95% of

those systems serve 10,000 people or fewer. Implementing

the new standard will present a challenge for both state staff

and utilities, particularly since the treatment needed for

compliance may be the first treatment that a utility has had to

install. Federal agencies, state drinking water programs, and

state DWSRF programs will have to work together to help

utilities meet the compliance deadline for the arsenic standard

and other rules that will come out over the next several years. 

EPA has developed a strategy for assisting small systems in

implementation of new standards that is based on simplifying

implementation of new rules, focusing technical assistance

and training, enhancing system sustainability, and targeting

financial assistance. With respect to implementation of the

arsenic standard, EPA is encouraging states to make appropriate

use of exemption authority under the Safe Drinking Water Act

(which can extend the time period over which a system must

come into compliance) and point-of-use (POU) treatment for

very small systems where POU is an acceptable option. The

agency is also working to focus technical assistance and

training on the new standard. In 2002, EPA will conduct

more than six implementation workshops around the country

for state staff, utilities, and other technical assistance

providers. The agency is also developing compliance guides

and design manuals for state staff, consultants, and utility staff

to assist them in making decisions about what technology best

fits the needs of a given utility. Because enhancing sustainability

of systems is one of EPA’s overarching goals for its drinking

water program, EPA is encouraging states to integrate their

existing capacity development strategies with the effort to

move systems towards compliance. Sustainable systems will
3

better meet the challenges presented by the arsenic standard

and other upcoming regulations. In some cases, systems may

identify opportunities for consolidation of management functions

or physical assets as they work to determine how they will

comply with the new rule. Finally, EPA is working with other

federal agencies and state DWSRF programs to target financial

assistance to those systems needing financial assistance to

achieve compliance. 

On the financial assistance front, EPA has entered into a

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the U.S. Department

of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service (RUS). In the MOA,

RUS agrees to give a high priority for infrastructure projects

needed for compliance with the arsenic standard and will give

high consideration to the funding of such projects from its

national reserve. The agreement also directs state Rural

Development staff to coordinate on funding decisions with

state DWSRF staff in an effort to make the most efficient use of

resources and reduce the burden on small systems seeking

capital improvement funds. EPA is likewise encouraging state

DWSRF staff to make an effort to meet with state Rural

Development staff. At the national level, the two agencies

agree to continue to work together to coordinate programs

and policies and to establish, as a priority use of technical

assistance resources, efforts to help systems comply with the

new arsenic standard.

One state that will be particularly impacted by the new

standard is already moving forward proactively to develop its

own strategy for getting small systems into compliance. The

State of Arizona is using a stakeholder process to develop an

Arsenic Master Plan (AMP) which integrates the state’s

regulatory compliance, capacity development, and infrastructure

funding programs in an effort to ensure that all systems meet

the 2006 compliance deadline. One of the goals of the AMP

is to develop an easy to understand guidance document that

will help systems understand what they will need to do in

order to comply with the rule. The guidance will include a

plain language summary of the rule and a decision tree to

help a system determine the best path to compliance using

non-treatment or treatment options. The guide will also

include a pre-design manual for various treatment options that

a system can adapt to conform to their system characteristics

so that they will not have to hire an engineer to do so.

Because many systems will require financial assistance to

make needed changes, the guidance will discuss the various

options available to a system. The Water Infrastructure

Finance Authority (WIFA), which manages the DWSRF program,

will prioritize arsenic-related projects for financial and

technical assistance through the DWSRF and will offer its

expertise in helping systems obtain other sources of financing.

WIFA is also working with the state public service commission

to streamline rate-setting practices to help systems that may

need to increase their rates to address capital and operational

needs. Finally, because the state recognizes that partnerships

will help it meet the implementation challenge, it is working

to identify technical assistance providers to help systems and

is also asking systems with good compliance records to serve

as a mentor for one or more smaller public water systems.

Drinking water program and WIFA staff will train the mentors

on the AMP and the goals of the program and participants will

get an award that they will be able to promote in their consumer

confidence reports. 

EPA believes that the efforts being made to help small

systems comply with the new standard will have far-reaching

benefits in helping these systems improve their technical,

financial, and managerial capacity and comply with other

regulations. The DWSRF program will prove to be a

significant tool in allowing states to help systems make

infrastructure improvements and in providing technical

assistance to systems using the set-asides. A new fact sheet

on how the DWSRF program can be used to help comply with

the new arsenic rule can be found on the EPA DWSRF website.
4

The UER process has been in place since mid-2001.

Favorable results are being reported by the RUS offices, and

EPA Region III staff have found it particularly helpful in

evaluating Congressional earmark projects. The UER

Guidance document is available on PA DEP’s website at

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/All_Final_Technical_g

uidance/bwsch/381-5511-111.pdf.

Questions about the UER process may be directed to

Peter Slack, PA DEP, Bureau of Water Supply and Wastewater

Management, 717-787-3481 or by e-mail at pslack@state.pa.us.

Ohio’s Water Resource

Restoration Sponsor Program

Overview

The Water Resource Restoration Sponsor Program, or WRRSP,

was created by Ohio EPA in 2000 as a component of its Clean

Water Act State Revolving Fund program (CWA SRF), called

the Ohio Water Pollution Control Loan Fund (WPCLF).

The purpose of this new program component is to

finance projects that either fully restore or protect water

resources through habitat restoration or protection.

Why the WRRSP?

Ohio water resource inventories since the early 1990s have

documented a significant shift in the causes and sources of

water quality impairment. Prior to this time, municipal and

industrial wastewater discharges were the predominant

sources of impairment to the state’s waters. However, with the

major accomplishments realized during the 1970s and 1980s

in improving wastewater treatment, the major sources of

water resource impairment and threats to water resources

already in attainment have changed to nonpoint sources of

pollution, in particular habitat degradation, the loss of riparian

stream corridor and buffer zones, sedimentation, and stream

channel modifications. This information made Ohio CWA SRF

program managers realize that if the WPCLF was to be an

effective tool in helping to bring about improved water quality

in Ohio, it had to address the current major sources of

STATE ACTIVITIES AND TRENDS

Coordination of Environmental

Reviews in Pennsylvania

Several state and federal agencies have worked out a mechanism

to promote efficiency in the environmental review process for

water and wastewater infrastructure projects seeking financial

assistance in Pennsylvania. The agencies involved are the PA

Department of Environmental Protection, the PA Department

of Community and Economic Development, the USDA Rural

Utilities Service, and the Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III.

The Uniform Environmental Review (UER) process

standardizes the requirements for documenting the

environmental impacts of proposed drinking water and

wastewater infrastructure projects requesting financial

assistance from various federal funding sources in

Pennsylvania. Basically, a funding applicant can complete one

environmental assessment (or request for a categorical

exclusion) that serves the purpose of each funding program.

This allows for a streamlining and coordination of the

environmental review of proposed projects and avoids major

inconsistencies or duplication of effort, particularly where

multiple sources of funding are involved.

The UER process also recognizes that most aspects of the

environmental assessment are also considered as part of the

PA DEP’s environmental planning and permitting processes.

This helps project sponsors to construct a stand-alone UER

document for funding consideration, either by “cutting and

pasting” from, or by cross-referencing, applicable elements of

state planning or permitting documents. 

The specific financial assistance programs that can utilize

the UER are:

1. The Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund 

2. The Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund 

3. The RUS Water and Waste Disposal Grant and Loan Program 

4. The Community Development Block Grant Program 

5. Congressional Earmark Funding
5

impairment in addition to providing loans for improving

municipal wastewater treatment systems.

Unlike point sources of pollution, nonpoint sources,

particularly those that are related to habitat degradation, are

not readily addressed through loans. This is because the

projects, which include purchasing and managing land or

restoring aquatic habitat, do not generate revenues which could

be used to repay a loan. As an example, the WPCLF, before the

inception of the WRRSP, only made three direct loans for

addressing habitat restoration needs. All three of these loans

were to the Ohio chapter of the Nature Conservancy for

restoration and protection work it is doing on Ohio Brush

Creek in Adams County. The experience with using low interest

rate direct loans to encourage these types of improvements

convinced Ohio EPA that another way had to be found to bring

about financing of these types of projects–one that would link a

revenue source with the necessary improvements.

Creation of the WRRSP

The major revenue generating sources which use WPCLF

financing are municipal wastewater treatment systems. It

occurred to Ohio EPA that if it could induce these loan

recipients, as a part of obtaining financing for improvements

to their wastewater systems, to increase the size of their loans

to fund habitat restoration and protection, then it could

harness the revenue generated by a municipal wastewater

utility to improve not only municipal wastewater treatment

facilities, but to also address some of the key sources of

impairment and threats to water quality in Ohio.

The key to establishing the WRRSP was to structure the

combination loans such that the municipal wastewater

treatment system would see no increase in cost from the

sponsorship. Using its authority to set interest rates from a

market rate of interest down to interest free loans, Ohio EPA

was able to restructure the original wastewater treatment

improvement loan so that the loan recipient, through sponsoring

a project that addresses water resource habitat issues, actually

saves money over what it would have cost to repay the original

loan for the wastewater facilities alone.

How the WRRSP Works

Recipients of direct loans for wastewater treatment or other

improvements, such as brownfields remediation, that are

interested can participate in the WRRSP program by undertaking

restoration or protection projects themselves

or by sponsoring another group, such as a

land trust, park district, or other entity with

the ability to protect and manage such

resources. The sponsor then provides

funds to complete an approved restoration

project. The cost of the WRRSP project is

added to the sponsor’s requested WPCLF

loan amount and the loan interest rate is

reduced to a percentage which produces in

the same total cost of borrowing (principal

plus interest) as the original loan without

the WRRSP project. The interest rate is

then reduced by an additional 0.1 percent.

The loan interest rate can go down to a

minimum of 0.2 percent. 

CONTINUED ON PAGE 6

Ohio’s Water Resource

Restoration Sponsor Program

Restoration Project

Implementing Partner

Community

Sponsor

CWSRF

Community and

implementing partner

enter into sponsorship

agreement

➊

➊

Community provides CWSRF

funding for sponsored

restoration project

➌

➌

Community

repays low-interest

loan to CWSRF

➍

➍

CWSRF provides

funding to community for

wastewater treatment and

restoration projects

➋

➋
6

OHIO’S WATER RESOURCE RESTORATION SPONSOR PROGRAM PROJECTS

Project Name Purpose Implementer Sponsor Amount $

Vermilion River riparian land acquisition Lorain County City of Vermilion 672,000

for protection Metro Park District

East Fork East Branch restoration of stream banks, Medina County Village of Lodi 1,730,000

Black River stream channel, and riparian Park District

habitat through land acquisition

Edison Woods preservation and restoration Erie County City of 6,000,000

Preserve of wooded wetlands and Metroparks Marion

headwater creeks

Upper Cuyahoga River, land acquisition and Village of Mantua Village of Mantua 1,500,000

bog preservation wetlands restoration

Honey Creek Wetlands wetland acquisition, and Honey Creek Tri-Cities Regional 1,906,000

& Great Miami River riparian land acquisition Watershed Association Water and Sewer

and enhancement District

Stillwater River riparian land acquisition Three Rivers Montgomery County 1,147,000

Protection Metroparks

Blanchard River riparian land acquisition Hancock County City of Findlay 650,000

Protection Park District

Sulphur Springs riparian land acquisition City of Solon City of Solon 1,153,000

Stream Preservation and stream channel restoration

Kent Dam Remova dam removal study City of Kent City of Massillon 1,240,000

Middle Cuyahoga

River Restoration

Singer Lake Bog bog acquisition Cleveland Museum of City of Massillon 300,000

Preservation Natural History

Mahoning River restoration plan Eastgate Regional City of Massillon 1,500,000

Restoration Council of Governments

Brewster Bog bog acquisition The Wilderness Center City of Massillon 1,000,000

Preservation

Steiner Woods wetland acquisition University of Akron City of Massillon 725,000

Wetland Preservation

Sawmill Creek headwater stream and Mill Creek Metroparks City of Massillon 2,000,000

Preservation wetland land acquisition
7

STATE ACTIVITIES AND TRENDS from page 5

The following hypothetical examples show how the discount works.

WPCLF Loan Without A WRRSP Project

Borrow $1 million for a Wastewater

Treatment Plant (WWTP) project

At a WPCLF interest rate of 3.80 percent,

total payments would equal $1,436,707

OR

WPCLF Loan With A $393,442

WRRSP Project Amount Added To The Loan

Borrow $1 million for the WWTP Project AND

$393,442 for the WRRSP Project

• Total loan amount equals $1,393,442.

• Interest rate reduced so repayments equal to

repayments that would have been made on the

original $1,000,000 loan—results in an interest

rate of 0.3 percent

• An additional incentive reduction of 0.1 percent

made in interest rate

• Final interest rate is 0.2 percent

• Total payments equal $1,422,193

• Applicant saves $14,514 in loan repayments over

original $1,000,000 loan at 3.80 percent

WRRSP Project Requirements

If the WRRSP project is carried out by a third party, both the

sponsor and the implementer enter into a sponsorship

agreement that establishes the obligations on the part of the

implementer to properly implement the project, and on the

part of the sponsor to fund the implementation of the project.

The sponsorship agreement becomes an attachment to the

loan agreement. The implementer also prepares a restoration

and protection plan which Ohio EPA reviews and approves as

part of its approval process for the loan. This plan identifies

the need, shows how the project will meet the need, provides

a plan for implementing and monitoring the improvements, as

well as a schedule and budget.

Any properties purchased as a part of the restoration or

protection project have to either have deed restrictions or

permanent conservation easements placed on the properties.

The following are the restrictions that apply to such properties.

1. The property shall be maintained in perpetuity as a

natural area.

2. There shall be no industrial, commercial, or agricultural

activity on the property.

3. The property may not be divided, partitioned, subdivided,

or conveyed except in its current configuration; i.e., all

parcels must be conveyed to one entity or person in their

entirety.

4. There shall be no mining, drilling, or exploring for or

removal of minerals, oil, or gas from the property.

5. Except as may be necessary for reasonable preservation,

management, and restoration purposes, there shall be no

ditching, draining, diking, filling, excavating, or removing

topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, or other materials.

6. There shall be no manipulation or alteration of creeks,

streams, surface or subsurface springs, or other bodies of

water, or any activities on, or uses of, the property

detrimental to water purity or quality. Restoration activities

involving surface water manipulation must be approved in

advance by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

7. There shall be no dumping of trash, garbage, or hazardous

or toxic substances.

8. Except as may be necessary for reasonable preservation,

management, or restoration purposes, there shall be no

building of new roads or other rights of way. Existing roads

may be maintained but shall not be widened or improved.

This restriction does not prohibit the development of

recreational trails for hiking, cross country skiing, nature

observation, or other similar purposes.

9. There shall be no recreational operation of snowmobiles,

dune buggies, motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, or other

motorized recreational vehicles.

10. There shall be no domestic livestock, no non-native

animals, and no feedlots permitted on the property. There

shall be no hunting or trapping except as necessary to

CONTINUED ON PAGE 8
8

STATE ACTIVITIES AND TRENDS from page 7

keep animal populations within numbers consistent with

the ecological balance of the property or as necessary to

protect human health and safety.

11. Except as may be necessary for reasonable preservation,

management, or restoration purposes, there shall be no

removal, destruction, cutting, trimming, or mowing of any

trees or other vegetation except as required to maintain a

diversity of naturally occurring habitat types and control

of exotics. No non-native species shall be introduced to

the property.

12. There shall be no use of insecticides, fungicides, or

rodenticides, unless necessary to protect human health

and safety. Herbicides may be used for the control of

state designated noxious weeds and for the control of

other invasive exotic plant species.

WRRSP Experience in Ohio

As of the end of 2001, more than $21.5 million had been

obligated to fund 14 projects around Ohio. Another $15

million is expected to be obligated in 2002. Sponsors have

either supported projects in their own locality or, as is the

case with the city of Marion and the city of Massillon,

supported projects in other parts of the state. A list and

description of the projects funded to date appears on page

6 of this newsletter.

Any questions regarding the WRRSP program in Ohio can

be directed to: Robert Monsarrat, Jr., Manager, Environmental

Planning Section, Division of Environmental and Financial

Assistance, Ohio EPA, P.O. Box 1049, Columbus, OH 43216-

1049, (614) 644-3655

State Activities and Trends Briefs

Washington’s InfrastructureDATABASE

Washington’s Infrastructure Assistance Coordination Council

(IACC) has developed an internet-accessible database that

locates funding or technical assistance for water quality

projects. The pull-down menus on the site offer potential

borrowers one easy-to-use location to check multiple funding

sources available in Washington state.

The database sorts assistance programs based on the type

of assistance (such as grant or loan), type of project (such as

wastewater treatment or wetland restoration), type of borrower

(such as local government or private landowner), and match

requirements. Once all search requirements are added, the

potential borrower pushes the ‘Get Results’ button and all

funding sources that meet the search criteria are listed for the

user. Potential borrowers can then link to the funding programs

found on the search results page.

IACC developed this web site to enhance the services the

organization already provides. IACC is an organization in

Washington that promotes partnerships with all levels of

government and works to enhance efficiency and coordination

of financial and technical assistance for borrowers. They act as

a forum for interested parties within the state to discuss issues

that hinder local governments from meeting their infrastructure

needs. The organization created the database and web site to

help borrowers simplify their funding source search and make

finding government funding in Washington easier.

The database can be found at www.infrafunding.wa.gov.

Michigan Completes Project with

Simultaneous DWSRF and CWSRF Loans

Adapted from the “Mt. Clemens Completes Improvements with

Simultaneous DWSRF and SRF Loans” article in the Spring/

Summer 2002 issue of The Loan Arranger, Michigan Department

of Environmental Quality (http://www.michigan.gov/deq).

In January 2002, the city of Mount Clemens, Michigan finished

a $36.5 million dollar project that combined drinking water

and clean water state revolving loans—one of the first projects in the nation to combine the funding sources. The project consisted of constructing an ozone disinfection facility for

additional purification of the town’s drinking water, correcting

problems associated with an undersized and unreliable water

main, and eliminating combined sanitary sewer overflows. Mt.

Clemens becomes the first Metro Detroit Community Water

Supplier to provide ozone treatment for its drinking water. 
9

IN THE WORKS

EPA Releases New Clean Water

Financing Website

The New Clean Water Financing Website

http://www.epa.gov/own/cwfinance

In an effort to improve user accessibility, EPA launched an

overall plan to revise the visual design and organization of all

EPA web pages by July 2002. As part of this agency-wide

revision effort, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Branch

released a new, enhanced version of its Clean Water Financing

website. This new website contains expanded information on

available funding resources, while incorporating all previous

information found on the original website.

In addition, users can now locate information specifically

geared for the CWSRF program by linking to the new Clean

Water State Revolving Fund website (http:www.epa.gov/owm/

cwfinance/cwsrf/). Information such as federal funding levels,

the National Information Management System reports, and

other important documentation is now available on this site.

Users will also find links to all 51 state financial and CWSRF

assistance websites, as well as newly designed sections for fact

sheets and local success stories organized by key topic area.

Examples include topic areas related to “Contamination

Cleanup and Remediation,” “Nonpoint Source, Watershed

Protection, and Estuary,” “Planning and Fund Management,”

and “Water Conservation and Reuse.”

New SRF State Activity Updates

EPA has recently published three new activity updates that

highlight innovative management of CWSRF programs. One

document, entitled Innovative Use of Clean Water State

Revolving Funds for Nonpoint Source Pollution, describes

some of the lending mechanisms that states have established for

nonpoint source lending programs. Case studies describe

Ohio’s use of a linked deposit program, Massachusetts’ development of a pass-through loan program with local governments, and Missouri’s use of a pass-through loan program

CONTINUED ON PAGE 10

From an administrative standpoint, the simultaneous

construction of a disinfection facility, water mains, and

sanitary sewers was a new cost accounting challenge for the

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, the Financial

Department for the city of Mt. Clemens, and the city’s engineering

firm. Four loans (two approved in 1998 and two approved in

1999) encompassed the simultaneous construction of sanitary

sewer and water main improvements. The DWSRF and CWSRF

loans financed $30 million of the roughly $36.5 million

expended to construct the entire series of eight projects.

The successful completion of the system improvements

for the city of Mt. Clemens is a good example of how cooperation

between a municipality, a private engineering firm, and state

government can work together in a complex situation to

improve the quality of drinking water and help protect state

surface waters.

Illinois Starts Leveraging their SRF Program

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s Financial

Assistance Program in the Bureau of Water started leveraging

both the clean water and drinking water SRF programs in June

2002. The initial leveraging bonds totaled $150 million. $100

million is expected to go toward clean water projects and the

remaining $50 million will go toward drinking water projects.

The loan rate to program participants is one-half the Bond

Buyer 20-year General Obligation Bond Index, with a minimum

of 2.5 percent. Moody’s gave the SRF revenue bonds a ‘Aaa’

rating and Fitch gave them a ‘AAA’ rating based on past loan

activity, the reserve requirements, and expected revenue from

loan repayments. The leveraging structure for Illinois is a hybrid

cash flow/reserve model. The bond indenture requires a

reserve fund equal to 50 percent of bond principal outstanding.

In addition, the program’s pledged cash flows are expected to

provide 180 percent debt service coverage.

Since 1988, Illinois EPA has made 364 CWSRF loans

totaling $1.3 billion and 97 DWSRF loans for $163 million.

The state decided to leverage in response to strong demand

for loans that exceeded funding available through a direct

loan program.
10

FAXBACK FORM

Please fax to EPA Headquarters:

CWSRF PROGRAM (Attn: S. Platt) • 202-501-2403 or DWSRF PROGRAM (Attn: V. Blette) • 202-564-3757

Comments on Current Newsletter:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Suggestions for Articles or Event Announcements in Future Newsletters:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you wish to receive future newsletters, please complete the following to be added to the mailing list:

Name: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Title: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Address: __________________________________________________________________________________________________

email: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

IN THE WORKS from page 9

with the Missouri Agriculture and Small Business

Development Authority.

* This document will be available on the new CWSRF website.

A second document, entitled One-Stop Shopping in the

CWSRF Program, describes some of the ways that states have

coordinated water quality funding programs and offered one

point of contact for potential assistance recipients. Case

studies in this document highlight efforts in Arizona, Montana,

and Washington.

* This document will be available on the new CWSRF website.

A third document, entitled Ohio’s Restoration Sponsor

Program Integrates Point Source & Nonpoint Source

Projects, highlights the Water Resource Restoration Sponsor

Program, which is also described by Bob Monsarrat of Ohio

EPA under the State Activities and Trends section of this

newsletter.

* This document is currently available on the new CWSRF

website (http://www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/cwsrf/

innovations.htm).
11

EVENTS

1. Association of State Drinking Water

Administrators Seventeenth Annual Conference

Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Date: September 30–October 3, 2002

Information: www.asdwa.org

2. National Association of Water Companies

105th Annual Conference

Location: Scottsdale, AZ

Date: October 6–9, 2002

Information: www.nawc.org

3. Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies

Annual Meeting

Location: San Juan, PR

Date: October 27–30, 2002

Information: www.amwa.net/features/meetings

4. Association of State and Interstate Water

Pollution Control Administrators with America’s

Clean Water Foundation World Watershed Summit 

Location: Washington, DC

Date: October 30–November 1, 2002

Information: www.asiwpca.org/events/yocw.html

5. American Society of Civil Engineers Civil

Engineering Conference and Exposition

Location: Washington, DC

Date: November 3–7, 2002

Information: www.asce.org/conferences/annual02

6. Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies

2002 Developments in Clean Water Law Seminar

Location: Denver, CO

Date: November 6–8, 2002

Information: www.amsa-cleanwater.org/meetings

7. Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities

2002 SRF Workshop

Location: Phoenix, AZ

Date: November 17–19, 2002

Information: www.cifanet.org/conferences/conferences.html

SRF LINKS

1. CWSRF/DWSRF@EPA

Both SRFs maintain pages on the EPA website with

information on the programs. Both sites contain guidance,

policy documents, and contact lists for state and regional

staff. The URLs are as follows:

• CWSRF: www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance

• DWSRF: www.epa.gov/safewater/dwsrf.html

The DWSRF site includes a link to a Local Drinking Water

Information page, which has state by state information on

drinking water systems and programs. Where available,

this page includes a link to state DWSRF programs.

2. National Associations

• American Water Works Association: www.awwa.org

• Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies:

www.amsa-cleanwater.org

• Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies:

www.amwa.net

• Association of State Drinking Water

Administrators: www.asdwa.org

• Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution

Control Administrators: www.asiwpca.org

• Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities:

www.cifanet.org

• National Association of Water Companies:

www.nawc.org

3. State Programs

Many SRF programs have websites that provide program

information and application materials. This newsletter

places a spotlight on Michigan.

• Michigan Department of Environmental Quality:

www.michigan.gov/deq/1,1607,7-135-3307_

3515---,00.html

For a complete list of links to all 51 state financial and CWSRF

assistance websites, visit www.epa.gov/owm/cwfinance/cwsrf/

contacts.htm.
12

IN THIS ISSUE.......

On the National Scene

• From the Hill

• Addressing the Challenge of the Arsenic Rule

State Activities and Trends

• Coordination of Environmental Reviews in Pennsylvania

• Ohio’s Water Resource Restoration Sponsor Program

• Washington’s InfrastructureDATABASE

• Michigan Completes Project with Simultaneous

DWSRF and CWSRF Loans

• Illinois Starts Leveraging their SRF Program

In the Works - Report on Ongoing SRF Activities

• EPA Releases New Clean Water Financing Website

• New SRF State Activity Updates!

SRF Fax Back • Events • SRF Links

United States

Environmental Protection

Agency

Washington, DC 20460

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use

$300

United States

Environmental Protection

Agency

Office of Water

(4101)

EPA-816-N-02-002

Summer 2002