Jump to main content or area navigation.

Contact Us

Water: Planning

Definitions: Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis


Strategic Target SP-10 [related to Strategic Target L in FY 07]

Measure: Number of water bodies identified in 2002 as not attaining standards where standards are now fully attained (cumulative). (2002 baseline: 39,798 water bodies identified by states as not meeting water quality standards. Water bodies where mercury is among multiple pollutants causing impairment may be counted toward this target when all pollutants but mercury attain standards, but must be identified as still needing restoration for mercury [1,703 impaired water bodies are impaired by multiple pollutants including mercury, and 6,501 are impaired by mercury alone].)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: This measure counts water bodies (segments). Two impairments restored on the same water body (assuming there were no other impairments on that water body) would count as one water body.

This measure is designed to demonstrate cumulative successes of the surface water program in achieving water quality standards in waters formerly assessed as not meeting water quality standards. It holds constant the fixed base of waters known to be impaired in 2002 and focuses on the cumulative number of those impaired waters that now meet water quality standards. The measure is calculated by comparing the fixed baseline of state- or EPA-listed waters in 2002 to the current list of impaired segments submitted in state reports every two years (next reports are due in 2008). Waters that are meeting water quality standards in the reporting year for the impairments listed in 2002 will be counted toward meeting this measure in that year. If a water body is impaired by multiple causes, it cannot be counted as meeting this measure until all those water quality standards are met, except as noted for mercury.

The baseline consists of 39,978 water bodies identified by states or EPA as not meeting water quality standards in 2002. The baseline includes all waters in categories 5, 4a, 4b, and 4c in 2002. Of these waters, 1,703 are impaired by multiple pollutants including mercury. Impairments identified after 2002 are not considered in counting waters under this measure; such impairments will be considered when revising this measure for future updates of the Strategic Plan.

Note that this measure differs from the version in the 2003-2008 Strategic Plan (Measure L was reported in FY 2007 and earlier). It uses a 2002 baseline rather than the previous 2000 baseline, and includes other refinements such as including category 4 waters in the baseline, and using a geo-referenced data system. EPA estimates that 1,876 waters reported under measure L would not count under the new version, and therefore can be added to SP-10 results if a grand total is desired.

If a water body in the 2002 baseline is subsequently re-segmented, it cannot be counted under SP-10 unless all the new segments meet the requirements for counting.

Impairment refers to the “impairment cause” in state-reported data, stored in NTTS or ADB. Any water body listed as impaired must have an impairment cause entered.

Attain water quality standards for all pollutants and impairments means that the water body is no longer impaired for any of the causes identified in 2002, as reflected in subsequent state-submitted assessments and EPA-approved 303(d) lists. Pollutants or impairments that are identified subsequently in later assessments and lists are not considered for this measure. EPA will consider adjusting the baseline to a different base year in future Strategic Plans. Water bodies where mercury is among multiple pollutants causing impairment may be counted toward this target when all pollutants but mercury attain standards. Of waters counted under this measure, EPA will continue to identify and track separately those waters still needing restoration for mercury.

Waters that are moved off the 303(d) list for the following reasons can be counted towards meeting this measure:

  1. Water no longer is impaired because of restoration activities – meets water quality standards.
  2. New monitoring data show water meets water quality standards; reason for recovery unspecified.
  3. Original basis for 303(d) listing is incorrect; water meets water quality standards.
  4. Change in water quality standards assessment methodology, water meets water quality standards.
  5. Water originally listed as threatened but has continued to meet water quality standards and is no longer considered threatened.
  6. Change in water quality standards; data show that water meets new water quality standards.

In Integrated Report terminology, to count toward this measure a water body must be placed in Categories 1 or 2 for all the pollutants and impairments that were identified in 2002 as not attaining standards. If any 2002 pollutants and impairments belong in Categories 4 or 5, the water cannot be counted. The water body also cannot be counted if it is moved to Category 3 for the 2002 impairment(s). Impairments first identified after 2002 are not considered in counting waters under this measure.

EPA will use the ATTAINS data system for documenting assessment decisions and tracking TMDL information.

Contact: Christopher Zabawa, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds zabawa.christopher@epa.gov; (202) 566-122

(top)

Strategic Target SP-11 [new measure in FY 08]

Measure: Remove the specific causes of waterbody impairment identified by states in 2002. (cumulative) (2002 baseline: Estimate of 69,677 specific causes of water body impairment identified by states.)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: This measure is closely related to measure SP-10, except that it counts impairments rather than water bodies. Two impairments removed from the same water body would count as two toward this measure. See the definition of SP-10 for a description of the concepts behind this measure.

The 2002 baseline consists of 69,677 waterbody impairments. The baseline includes impairments for segments in categories category 5, 4a, 4b, and 4c as of 2002.

Impairment refers to the “impairment cause” in state-reported data, stored in ATTAINS. Any water body listed as impaired must have an impairment cause entered.

Remove means the original specific cause of impairment listed by the state or EPA is no longer impairing the water body, as reflected in state-submitted assessments and EPA-approved 303(d) lists.

EPA will use the ATTAINS data system for documenting assessment decisions and tracking TMDL information.

Contact: Christopher Zabawa, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds zabawa.christopher@epa.gov; (202) 566-12

(top)

SP-12 [same as WQ-32 in FY 2007]

Measure: By 2012, improve water quality conditions in 250 impaired watersheds nationwide using the watershed approach (cumulative).

(2002 baseline: 0 watersheds improved of an estimated 4,767 watersheds of focus having one or more water bodies impaired. The watershed boundaries for this measure are those established at the "12-digit" scale by the U.S. Geological Survey [USGS]. Watersheds at this scale average 22 square miles in size. "Improved" means that one or more of the impairment causes identified in 2002 are removed for at least 40 percent of the impaired water bodies or impaired miles/acres, or there is significant watershed-wide improvement, as demonstrated by valid scientific information, in one or more water quality parameters associated with the impairments.)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition/How to Report: This measure will establish and demonstrate a capacity for watershed-scale restoration and protection throughout the country using the "watershed approach." It is not designed to be a measure of what portion of the 12-digit watersheds in the country have improved or meet water quality standards. See below for a description of how the program will focus its attention on these watersheds.

Watershed means (a) a watershed or hydrologic unit at the 12-digit scale, as determined by the draft or final Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD), or (b) a regionally defined hydrologic unit of appropriate scale. Option (b) is provided since some waters, such as coastal and estuary waters, fall outside the WBD, and may or may not be hydrologically definable at a scale comparable to inland HUC-12s. Although watersheds or hydrologic units at the 12-digit scale are technically termed "sub-watersheds" by USGS, the Strategic Plan will use the term "watershed" for simplicity. There is a universe of approximately 160,000 12-digit watersheds in the United States.

An impaired watershed is a watershed containing one or more impaired water bodies.

Impaired water bodies are those identified by states and EPA in the baseline for SP-10.

Watershed approach is a coordinating process for focusing on priority water resource problems that:

  • Is focused on hydrologically defined areas,
  • Involves key stakeholders,
  • Uses an iterative planning or adaptive management process to address priority water resource goals, and
  • Uses an integrated set of tools and programs.

Functionally, the watershed approach is a problem-solving tool for protecting water quality and aquatic resources. It recognizes that factors affecting the health of our nation’s waters should be understood within their watershed context. It includes assessment of relevant watershed processes and socioeconomic factors, identification of priority issues and most promising corrective actions, involvement by affected parties throughout the process, and implementation at the required scale.

Improved means either that:

  • One or more of the waterbody/impairment causes identified in 2002 are removed, as reflected in EPA-approved state assessments, for at least 40% of the impaired water bodies or impaired stream miles/lake acres in the watershed; OR
  • There is significant watershed-wide improvement, as demonstrated by valid scientific information, in one or more water quality parameters or related indicators associated with the impairments.

Watersheds of focus are watersheds in which Regions and states will be focusing application of the watershed approach to attain this measure. EPA regions and the states will maintain lists of the "watersheds of focus." Regions and states have identified an estimated 4,767 watersheds of focus. The watersheds of focus include watersheds that may be amenable to water quality improvement in the near term (five years), as well as watersheds where improvement may take much longer. In many cases, the time frame cannot be predicted without more information gathered for watershed planning. EPA envisions flexibility in identifying the watersheds of focus over time. EPA and the states may add, change, or remove watersheds they are focusing on as new information becomes available or as resources are reallocated. The measure thus envisions "living" lists of watersheds.

Additional Guidance:The following document in pdf format provides the above definitions plus important additional guidance and templates for reporting under this measure: SP-12 Guidance 1-31-08. Results should be reported using the templates in the above guidance. The following links provide MS Word© versions of the templates.

SP-12 Template 1 (8.10.07)
SP-12 Template 2 (8.10.07)
SP-12 Template 3 (8.10.07)

Contact: Christopher Zabawa, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds zabawa.christopher@epa.gov; (202) 566-122

(top)

Strategic Target SP-13 [new measure in FY 08]

Measure:Ensure that the condition of the nation's wadeable streams does not degrade (i.e., there is no statistically significant increase in the percent of streams rated "poor" and no statistically significant decrease in the streams rated "good").

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: HQ

Definition: The results of this measure will be determined by comparing the results of the 2006 baseline with the next Wadeable Streams Survey to be completed in 2011. Therefore, there will be no reporting until 2012.

The 2006 baseline reflects the draft results of the Wadeable Streams Assessment, published in April 2006. It showed:

  • 28 percent of streams in good condition
  • 25 percent in fair condition
  • 42 percent in poor condition

EPA and its collaborating partners are on a schedule to conduct similar assessments of other types of waterbodies (e.g., lakes, large rivers, and wetlands) in the future, with the goal of producing updated assessments for each type of waterbody every five years. These repeated studies will ensure that the public remains informed as to whether the collective efforts to protect and restore the nation’s waters are meeting with success.

The next wadeable streams assessment is planned for completion in time to assess results by 2012. It is currently planned to be an independent statistical sample, though it could be redesigned to include a partial longitudinal study of the same streams sampled in 2006. Targets and results will be reported nationally with a confidence interval of plus or minus 3.5%, and by EPA region at plus or minus 10-15%.

“Does not degrade” means that in the Wadeable Streams Survey to be completed in 2011, there will be: 42 percent in poor condition

  • No statistically significant increase in the national proportion of wadeable streams in the category of Poor compared to the 2006 results (42%), AND
  • No statistically significant decrease in the national proportion of wadeable streams in the category of Good (28%).

“Good,” “Fair,” or “Poor” are not related to water quality standards. They are determined by national assessment protocols, comparing conditions in sampled streams with conditions in reference streams representing “least disturbed” conditions in the same general ecological area.

EPA intends to continue development of national measures for additional types of water bodies in future Strategic Plans, beginning with lakes based on the planned Lakes Survey.

Contact: Susan Holdsworth, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
holdsworth.susan@epa.gov; (202) 566-118

(top)

Strategic Target SP-14 [related to Strategic Target N in FY 07]

Measure: Improve water quality in Indian country at monitoring stations in tribal waters (cumulative) (i.e., show improvement in one or more of seven key parameters: dissolved oxygen, pH, water temperature, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, pathogen indicators, and turbidity). (cumulative)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: PDF attachment

Contact: Fred Leutner, Office of Science and Technology
leutner.fred@epa.gov; (202) 566-037

(top)

Strategic Target SP-15 [related to Strategic Target O in FY 07]

Measure:By 2015, in coordination with other federal agencies, reduce by 50 percent the number of homes on tribal lands lacking access to basic sanitation (cumulative).

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Headquarters

Definition:The data source for this measure is the IHS Sanitation Deficiency System (SDS) database in STARS. The IHS information captures a significant percentage of the federal funding for tribal access to basic sanitation, which will allow EPA to more accurately track the overall efforts of the federal government in meeting the tribal basic access to sanitation goal.

Lacking access to basic sanitation is defined for this measure as IHS Initial Deficiency Levels 4 and 5. For the baseline year of FY 2003, the Indian Health Service data indicated that 8.4 percent of homes on tribal lands lacked access to basic sanitation – that is, 26,777 homes lacking access out of an estimated 319,070 homes. It should be noted that the Indian Health Service database of homes lacking access fluctuates every year given the following variables: new needs, new homes, lifecycle costs, homes where water and wastewater facilities fall out of compliance, new environmental regulations, construction inflation, and population growth.

For FY 2008, the target is 6.65% of homes lacking access to basic sanitation (21,219 homes lacking access out of 319,070 total homes on tribal lands).

For 2015, the target is 4.2% of homes lacking access to basic sanitation (13,401 homes lacking access out of 319,070 total homes on tribal lands).

This measure is related to the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing by 50 percent the number of homes in Indian Country that lack access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. By itself, EPA lacks the funding that is necessary to meet this goal. Therefore EPA is facilitating an Inter-Agency Tribal Infrastructure Taskforce to develop a coordinated approach to improve access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation in Indian Country. The Taskforce consists of staff from

  • EPA’s Office of Water;
  • U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Native American Programs;
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) – Rural Assistance/Rural Utility Service;
  • U.S. Department of the Interior (DoI) – Bureau of Indian Affairs & Bureau of Reclamation; and
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - Indian Health Service (IHS).

The Taskforce has developed two Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) that are being signed at the Administrator level. The MOUs are intended to help each agency become aware of the universe of federal efforts and to provide all the partner agencies with the ability to examine programs and funding priorities within the broader context of meeting the USG access commitments. These MOUs will also help to streamline the process for tribes to fund projects from multiple sources, and assist in the development of inter-agency agreements.

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-056

(top)

WQ-1 (a,b) [related to WQ-2 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number of States and Territories that have adopted EPA approved nutrient criteria into their water quality standards, or are on schedule with a mutually agreed-upon plan to adopt nutrient criteria into their water quality standards.

Parts a) and b) are reported separately in the Annual Commitment System.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:

(a) Number of States and Territories that have adopted approved nutrient criteria into their water quality standards.

A State or Territory will be counted if it has adopted nutrient criteria for all waters needing water quality standards (WQSs) for nutrients and if EPA has approved those standards. To qualify, the nutrient criteria must:

  • Be numeric or narrative with quantitative endpoints; and
  • Address either both nitrogen and phosphorus or a causal/response pair of variables (e.g., phosphorus and chlorophyll-a); and
  • Apply to all applicable waters of one or more waterbody types (e.g., lakes/reservoirs or rivers/streams) in the State/Territory where it has been determined that nutrient criteria are important to protect the designated use, except multi-state waterbodies may be excluded; and
  • Have been approved by EPA.

(b) Number of States and Territories that are on schedule with a mutually agreed-upon plan to develop and adopt such criteria.

A State or Territory will be counted if it has a plan, mutually agreed-upon with EPA, to develop nutrient criteria, and it has met prior year milestones and is meeting the current year milestones in the schedule in its most recent mutually-agreed-upon plan. This is not a cumulative measure. Each State or Territory will be evaluated anew each fiscal year to determine whether it is on schedule compared to that year’s milestones and commitments.

Note: This FY 2008 definition for WQ-1b differs significantly from the FY 2007 definition as follows:

  • The “weight-of-evidence” approach for evaluating a State or Territory’s “on schedule” status is no longer allowed.
  • Consideration of “unusual circumstances in other years” is no longer allowed for evaluating a State or Territory’s “on schedule” status.
  • Reporting results will be tracked in the WQS Actions Tracking Application (WATA).

Reporting of results for this measure will be generated from the WQS Actions Tracking Application (WATA). Regions will maintain data regarding nutrient criteria and mutually agreed-upon plans in WATA.

Contact: Gregory Stapleton, Office of Science and Technology
stapleton.gregory@epa.gov; (202) 566-102

(top)

WQ-2 [related to WQ-4 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of Tribes that have water quality standards approved by EPA. (cumulative)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: This is a cumulative measure.

A Tribe should be counted as having EPA-approved water quality standards (WQS) if all three of the following criteria have been met:

  • The Tribe has been authorized to administer its own water quality standards program (i.e., EPA has found it eligible for treatment in the same manner as a state, TAS); and
  • Tribe has adopted and submitted an initial set of water quality standards to EPA; and
  • EPA has approved the initial standards.

In addition, Tribes having EPA-promulgated federal standards will count under this measure.

Reporting of results for this measure will be generated from the WQS Actions Tracking Application (WATA) and submitted by OST to the Annual Commitment System after confirmation with Regional WQS Coordinators. Regions will maintain data regarding initial tribal WQS submissions in WATA. These data include whether the submission is an initial one and whether it has been approved by EPA.

Because this is a cumulative measure, the FY 2008 targets should count the number of authorized Tribes expected to have approved water quality standards at the end of FY 2007 and add to this figure a challenging but realistic number of additional Tribes expected to receive EPA approval for their water quality standards during FY 2008.

The FY 2006 results for this measure was 31 Tribes:
Region 4- Seminole, Miccosukee
Region 5- Fond du Lac, Mole Lake, Grand Portage
Region 6- Pueblos of: Isleta, Sandia, San Juan, Santa Clara, Picuris, Nambe, Pojoaque, Tesuque, Acoma, Taos
Region 8- Salish & Kootenai (Flathead Reservation), Ft. Peck
Region 9- White Mountain Apache, Hoopa Valley, Hualapai, Big Pine, Navajo
Region 10- Puyallup, Chehalis, Warm Springs, Umatilla, Spokane, Kalispel, Port Gamble S’Klallam, Makah; Colville (via EPA promulgation)

Contact: Gregory Stapleton, Office of Science and Technology
stapleton.gregory@epa.gov; (202) 566-102

(top)

WQ-3 (a,b) [related to WQ-5 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of a) States and Territories, b) authorized Tribes that within the preceding three year period, submitted new or revised water quality criteria acceptable to EPA that reflect new scientific information from EPA or other sources not considered in the previous standards.

[WQ-3a is a PART annual output measure for the Water Pollution Control Grants (Section 106) program.] Parts a) and b) are reported separately in ACS.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:

  • Acceptable to EPA means that EPA has approved the new or revised criteria for that State, Territory, or Tribe.
  • Three year period means May 1, 2005, through April 30, 2008, to allow at least 5 months for EPA approval.
  • New scientific information from EPA includes, but is not limited to, draft or final water quality criteria documents, and updated information posted on https://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/. ORPHAN It could also include revised criteria implementation guidance, and scientific information provided by EPA Regions or other EPA Offices to assist State, Territorial, or Tribal adoption of statewide or local criteria.

How to Report: Reporting of results for this measure will be generated from the WQS Actions Tracking Application (WATA) and submitted by OST to the Annual Commitment System after confirmation with Regional WQS Coordinators. Regions will identify in WATA any submissions or submission parts that include one or more new water quality criteria or revised criteria acceptable to EPA that reflect new scientific information not considered in the previous criteria. Adoption and EPA approval of initial Tribal standards that include water quality criteria will enable a Tribe to be counted under this measure.

The WATA system will be used to identify all submissions received May 1, 2005 through April 30, 2008 that meet the above criteria and can therefore be reported as meeting the measure.

If a state, territory, or tribe has not adopted any such criteria, the entity can nevertheless be counted under this measure if:

(a) EPA has not issued any new or revised water quality criteria applicable to that entity’s water including revisions to the published table of EPA recommended criteria at https://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/wqcriteria ORPHAN/BROKEN that would trigger this measure. For toxic pollutants, “applicable to that state’s water” includes pollutants that are reasonably expected to interfere with designated uses; OR

(b) The entity completed a defensible scientific review of the new scientific information EPA has issued and has determined that no changes are needed to their existing water quality criteria. This would be counted for FY 2007 if the associated public review and comment occurred within the past three years; OR

(c) The reporting date is within three years of the time EPA approved the initial Tribal standards for a Tribe.

Note the overlap in time periods: a state that made such a submittal, in, say, July 2007, would get counted in FY 2007, 2008, and 2009. Conversely, a state that last adopted such criteria, say, November 2004, would get counted in FY 2007 but not in FY 2008. Biocriteria that are reflected explicitly in designated uses would count.

Note that the measure allows EPA from 5 to 41 months to approve the criteria, depending on the date of submission during the three-year period specified above.

Universe: The universe that OST will use for calculating percentages is:

  • 56 States and Territories (DC, PR, VI, GU, CNMI, AS)
  • The number of Tribes with EPA-approved water quality standards as of the end of FY 2007. This will be the results from measure WQ-2, excluding any tribes whose standards are completely promulgated by EPA (currently only the Colville Tribe). See the list of tribes as of September 30, 2006, in the description for measure WQ-2.
     
    Contact: Gregory Stapleton, Office of Science and Technology
    stapleton.gregory@epa.gov; (202) 566-102

(top)

WQ-4 (a,b) [related to WQ-6 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Percent of a) State and Territorial, b) Tribal water quality standards submissions (received in the 12 month period ending April 30th of the fiscal year) that are approved by EPA. Partial approvals receive fractional credit.

[WQ-4a is a PART annual output measure for the Surface Water Protection program]

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:

  • Submission means a single package of new or revised water quality standards duly transmitted to EPA in accordance with 40 CFR parts 131 or 132. Typically the submission would be the set of documents transmitted by one letter from a State, Territorial, or Tribal official, including a certification from the Attorney General or equivalent. A submission can include triennial reviews, statewide WQS revisions, use attainability analyses or site-specific criteria for individual waters, general policies, anti-degradation policies or procedures, and variances. In short, anything duly submitted to EPA pursuant to 131.20 that we must act upon.
  • Partial approvals receive fractional credit means that partial approvals count proportionally. The proportion is determined by the number of provisions approved compared to the total number of provisions in a submission. For example, a submission would receive a credit of 0.85 submission if the Region approved 17 of the 20 provisions in the submission. Use a default of 0.50 submission for a partial approval if the number of provisions in a submission cannot be readily estimated.
  • Tribal water quality standards means standards adopted and submitted by a Tribe that EPA has found eligible for “treatment in the same manner as a state” (TAS) to administer a water quality standards program. Where a Tribe submitted its initial WQS with the TAS application, the WQS submission date for WQ-4 is counted as EPA's approval date of the TAS application.

Methodology for Computing: The purpose of this measure is to provide insight into the “approvability” of state submissions. A disapproval or a “no action” does not count toward meeting this measure.

This measure will be computed using information in the WQS Actions Tracking Application (WATA) system.

Reporting of results for this measure will be generated from WATA and submitted by OST to the Annual Commitment System after confirmation with Regional WQS Coordinators.

Universe: The universe changes annually based on the number of submissions. For FY 2008 the number of new or revised submissions during May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008, will be the universe. The WATA system will count the number of such submissions or fractions of submissions that EPA approved through September 30, 2008. Note that this measure allows from 5 to 17 months for an approval to occur, depending on the date of submission

Contact: Gregory Stapleton, Office of Science and Technology
stapleton.gregory@epa.gov; (202) 566-102

(top)

WQ-5 [related to WQ-7 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of States and Territories that have adopted and are implementing their monitoring strategies in keeping with established schedules.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: "In keeping with established schedules" means that States include in their annual Section 106 Monitoring Initiative workplans specific actions that are intended to implement their monitoring strategies and that States demonstrate they are making a good faith effort to do these activities.

Examples of specific activities include:

  • Data system implementation for data sharing and uploading of data and assessments to national systems,
  • Expanding coverage of waters and assessments through application of statistically valid monitoring designs and assessment methodologies,
  • Expand the use and rigor of biological monitoring and the development of improved assessment, stressor identification and reporting tools, and
  • Developing new tools such as predictive technology and remote sensing to refine applications of monitoring data.

    Contact: Joan Warren, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
    warren.joan@epa.gov; (202) 564-1215

(top)

WQ-6 (a,b) [related to WQ-8 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number of Tribes that currently receive funding under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act that have developed and begun implementing monitoring strategies that are appropriate to their water quality program consistent with EPA Guidance, and the number that are providing water quality data in a format accessible for storage in EPA’s data system.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition:
WQ-6a counts Tribes that have developed and submitted to the Region water monitoring strategies that are consistent with the EPA 106 monitoring strategy template. These strategies are developed in partnership with Regional staff and deemed appropriate for the level (fundamental, intermediate or advanced) of any particular Tribe as considered by the Regional office. All Tribes should be expected to submit and to have begin implementing (this may include implementation planning) a monitoring strategy, its complexity a function of many considerations. Some Tribes will need close attention of the Regional office, while others will need minimal assistance. However, all strategies should have Regional scrutiny for adherence to the template and Tribes should be offered assistance where necessary.

WQ-6b counts Tribes that are submitting data electronically to STORET on the parameters appropriate for their level of monitoring. Tribes may use any of the available methods for submitting data to STORET: 1) using a copy of their local STORET submitted to EPA, 2) using the Water Quality Exchange (WQX), 3) using EPA's template to submit data via either National WebSIM or a regionally hosted WebSIM, or 4) providing data in the EPA template to their respective EPA Region.

Contact: Otto Gutenson, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
gutenson.otto@epa.gov; (202) 566-118

(top)

WQ-7 [related to WQ-11 in FY 07]

Measure:

Number of States and Territories that provide electronic information using the Assessment Database version 2 or later (or compatible system) and geo-reference the information to facilitate the integrated reporting of assessment data. (cumulative)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: This measure counts States and Territories using ADB Version 2 (or compatible electronic format) and providing geo-referencing information on the assessment unit locations for the Integrated Report/305b/303d report that they submit to EPA. Compatible electronic format means having the same data elements/fields as ADB Version 2. This measure is cumulative.

A State or Territory will be counted as meeting this measure if it is using Version 2 in FY 07 and will submit its 2008 IR/303d/305b report using ADB Version 2.0 (or newer). We expect that a State's 2008 IR/303d/305b report could be viewed via the Agency's website with minimal reworking by EPA or our contractor and without lengthy discussions with State staff about the accuracy of their data.

Contact: Joan Warren, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
warren.joan@epa.gov; (202) 566-121


(top)

WQ-8 (a,b) [related to WQ-13 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of TMDLs that are
(a) developed by States and approved by EPA or established by EPA (Total TMDLs), and
(b) developed by States and approved by EPA (State TMDLs) on a schedule consistent with national policy.

Type: Target
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: MS Word attachment

Contact: Sarah Furtak, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
furtak.sarah@epa.gov; (202) 566-116

(top)

WQ-9 (a,b,c) [related to WQ-15 (a,b,c) for FY 07]

Measure: Estimated annual reduction in million pounds of nitrogen, phosphorus, and tons of sediment from nonpoint sources to waterbodies (Section 319 funded projects only).

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Headquarters

Definition: EPA collects this information in its Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) for Section 319-funded on-the-ground implementation projects where one or more of these three pollutants are addressed by the project. States are not strictly required to enter this information into GRTS until after one full year of project implementation; although they may enter data prior to the one-year period if they so choose. Therefore, load reduction data entered into GRTS in a particular year usually reflect the results of a project that was implemented during a previous grant year.

EPA HQ will provide this information based on data entry in GRTS. No Regional breakdown of load reductions will be provided.

Contact: Dov Weitman, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
weitman.dov@epa.gov; (202) 566-120

(top)

WQ-10 [related to WQ-16 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of waterbodies identified by States (in 2000 or subsequent years) as being primarily nonpoint source (NPS)-impaired that are partially or fully restored. (cumulative)

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: This is the main long-term environmental results measure for the NPS program.

By "fully restored," EPA means that all designated uses are now being met. By "partially restored," EPA means either of the following two conditions are being met:

a) A waterbody that has a use that is initially impaired by more than one pollutant, but after restoration efforts meets the criteria for one or more (but not all) of those pollutants, or
b) A waterbody that initially has more than one use that is less than fully supported, but after restoration efforts one or more (but not all) of those uses becomes fully supported.

The target of 250 waters by 2008 and 700 by 2012 refer to partially and fully restored waterbodies combined.

Since the main referent for this measure will be State 303(d) or Integrated Reports, States which did not submit 2000 303(d) lists may substitute the 1998 list for their base year. "Waterbodies" therefore refer to 303(d)-listed segments or category 4 or 5 waters on the Integrated Report. The measure is meant to include not only waterbodies restored by 319-funded projects, but instead counts all primarily NPS-impaired waterbodies that a state fully or partially restores, regardless of funding source. Although restoration efforts may have begun prior to the 1998/2000 base year, the waterbody must have been impaired as of the year 1998/2000.

Waters listed after 1998/2000 which are then de-listed from the 303(d) list (for some or all pollutants) or which move from categories 4 (which includes waters impaired by "pollution") or 5 to category 1 or 2 may also be counted against this measure. In other words, although 1998/2000 is the base year, the 303(d) lists for those years need not be the only referent lists.

On an ad hoc basis, EPA may approve counting a water against this measure that has been partially or fully restored, but not yet removed from the 303(d) list. This will only occur if the water has actually been restored; EPA will not count cases where the State merely believes the water will be restored by the time of their next 303(d) listing.

Please note that a water cannot be counted simply because it has been de-listed from a state 303(d) list, or moves from categories 4 or 5 to 1 or 2, for reasons other than actual restoration (e.g., it is determined that it was inappropriately listed in the first place, it has a TMDL done for it, etc.).

There may be times when a water does not actually change categories, but a use has been restored. Take the following situation: a water is listed under both categories 2 and 5 in one reporting year, and then under these same categories the next reporting year, even though one of the water’s uses has gone from not supported to fully supported. For example, if a water has three uses, and in the first reporting year has one use fully supported and two uses not supported, it might be listed under both categories 2 and 5. If in the next reporting year, one of the two uses that was previously not supported becomes fully supported, then the water would still be listed under categories 2 and 5 - but a use will have been restored (i.e. the bar for "partially restored" will have been met). If a use has actually been restored, then this water may be counted against this measure, regardless of whether or not the categorization of the water stays static.

In addition, a water will not be counted towards this measure if no specific management activities have been taken (by any party) within the watershed to improve water quality. Furthermore, a given water cannot be counted twice under this measure if it goes from impaired to partially restored, and then from partially restored to fully restored. Any given water may only be counted once under this measure. For a water to be counted as "partially or fully restored," it must be described by a story on EPA's NPS Success Story Website (https://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/Success319/). ORPHAN  On the Success Stories web site, the heading "Stories about partially or fully restored water bodies" is the section that refers to this measure. Without such a story, the water will not be counted against this measure.

Success stories submitted for States or Tribes should be 2 pages or less and include the following:

  • Title
  • Problem
  • Results (monitoring data or a narrative description of improvements, consistent with state 303(d) listing and delisting methodologies)
  • Partners and funding
  • Photos and/or Table/graph/chart showing water quality data (where applicable and available)
  • GRTS project number(s) (where applicable)
  • Year waterbody listed or de-listed (or proposed to be de-listed) from 303(d) list
  • Contact information

A story may include more than one waterbody, where appropriate.

As for determining whether or not a water is "primarily" NPS-impaired, this will be left to the best professional judgment of the States. EPA does not expect that the State should do a detailed analysis when making a judgment on whether a given water is "primarily" NPS-impaired, when a precise determination would be exceedingly difficult (such as, for example, when a single listed water moves through both permitted MS4 areas as well as through non-permitted areas).

Finally, it is important to note that the criteria for measures WQ-10, SP-10, and SP-12 are not the same; therefore, a waterbody may be credited under one of these measures but not the others.

Contact: Dov Weitman, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
weitman.dov@epa.gov; (202) 566-120

(top)

WQ-11 [related to WQ-17 in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of follow-up actions that are completed by assessed NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) programs. (cumulative)

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-056

(top)

WQ-12 (a,b) [related to WQ-18 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of facilities covered by NPDES permits that are considered current, and of those, the number and national percent of tribal facilities covered.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-056

(top)

WQ-13 (a,b,c) [related to WQ-20 (a,b,c) in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of facilities covered under either an individual or general permit by type: a) MS-4s; b) industrial storm water; c) construction storm water sites; and d) CAFOs.

Type: Indicator Measure
Who Reports in ACS: Region

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-056

(top)

WQ-14 (a,b) [related to WQ-21 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of (a) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) in POTWs with Pretreatment Programs that have control mechanisms in place that implement applicable pretreatment requirements; and, (b) Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs) in non-pretreatment POTWs that have control mechanisms in place that implement applicable pretreatment requirements.

Type: TWQ-14a is and Target measure; WQ-14b is an Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-05

(top)

WQ-15 (a,b) [related to WQ-22 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Percent of major dischargers in Significant Noncompliance (SNC) at any time during the fiscal year, and of those, the number, and national percent, discharging pollutant(s) of concern on impaired waters.

Type: WQ-15a is a Target measure; WQ-15b is an Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-05

(top)

WQ-16 [related to WQ-23 in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of all major publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs) that comply with their permitted wastewater discharge standards (i.e. POTWs that are not in significant non-compliance).

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Headquarters

Definition: This is a Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) PART measure.

The numerator is the number of major Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) that have been flagged for effluent Significant Non-Compliance (SNC) within the fiscal year. The denominator is based upon the current major POTWs in both PCS and ICIS. PCS was used for the states that have not migrated to ICIS.

This measure is the rate of SNC attributable to violations of effluent limitations in permits for NPDES majors. Violations are a subset of total SNC.

Contact: Sylvia Bell, Office of Wastewater Management
bell.sylvia@epa.gov; (202) 564-062

(top)

WQ-17 [related to WQ-24 in FY 07]

Measure: Fund utilization rate [cumulative loan agreement dollars to the cumulative funds available for projects] for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF).

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: This is a PART measure. The numerator is the cumulative amount of assistance provided by the CWSRFs to communities for water quality projects. The denominator is the cumulative amount of funds in the CWSRF that are available for projects.

The measure indicates the rate at which CWSRFs commit available funds to water quality projects.

Contact: Sylvia Bell, Office of Wastewater Management
bell.sylvia@epa.gov; (202) 564-06

(top)

WQ-18 [related to WQ-25 (a,b) in FY 07]

Measure: Number of people served by projects that protect or restore waterbody uses that impact human health per million dollars of CWSRF assistance provided for that purpose.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Headquarters

Definition: This is a CWSRF PART measure. The numerator is the number of people served by CWSRF projects that protect or restore waterbody uses that impact human health. The denominator is the amount of CWSRF assistance provided to projects (in millions of dollars) that protect or restore waterbody uses that impact human health.

The measure indicates how efficiently, in terms of the number of people served, the CWSRF delivers human health benefits through the protection or restoration of waterbodies.

Contact: Sylvia Bell, Office of Wastewater Management
bell.sylvia@epa.gov; (202) 564-06

(top)

WQ-19 (a,b) [related to WQ-29 (a,b,c) in FY 07]

Measure: Number, and national percent, of high priority state NPDES permits and high priority EPA (including tribal) NPDES permits, that are issued as scheduled.

Type: Target measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-056

(top)

WQ-20 [related to WQ-30a in FY 07]

Measure: Number of facilities that have traded at least once plus all facilities covered by an overlay permit that incorporates trading provisions with an enforceable cap.

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Contact: Kristy Owen, Office of Wastewater Management
owen.kristy@epa.gov; (202) 564-056

(top)

WQ-21 [related to WQ-33 in FY 07]

Measure: Number of water segments identified as impaired in 2002 for which States and EPA agree that initial restoration planning is complete (i.e., EPA has approved all needed TMDLs for pollutants causing impairments to the waterbody or has approved a 303(d) list that recognizes that the waterbody is covered by a Watershed Plan [i.e., Category 4b or Category 5m]). (cumulative)

Type: Indicator measure
Who Reports in ACS: Regions

Definition: PDF attachment

Contact:Sarah Furtak, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
furtak.sarah@epa.gov; (202) 566-1167

(top)


Jump to main content.