Message
From: Sent: To:
CC: Subject: Attachments:
Mike Keegan [keegan@ruralwater.org] 6/16/2017 6:08:01 PM Greenwalt, Sarah [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=6cl3775b8f424e90802669b87bl35024-Greenwalt,] Sam Wade [sam@nrwa.org]; matt [matt@nrwa.org] Re: Small and rural community EPA technical assistance EPA on-site technical assistance letter FINAL.PDF
Hello Sarah, Attached is the Senators' letter to the Administrator that we discussed, urging him to use his discretion to help small and rural communities with EPA technical assistance. The letter clearly explains the request. Thank you again for the consideration and we are eager to answer any questions.
Mike Keegan, Analyst National Rural W ater Association Washington, DC
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Mike Keegan <keegan@ruralwater.org> wrote:
Sarah, Thank you for the meeting. To clarify a few of the items we discussed:
1. Small and rural communities (all regulated by the EPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act) believe that the Congressional funding for technical assistance for compliance help would be much more helpful and beneficial if EPA were to dedicate all the $12.7 million in the FY2Q17 appropriations bill to the recently authorized technical assistance in the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 IJ.S.C.300i~l(e)), and we believe that EPA has such discretion.
2. It is my understanding the sponsors of the recently enacted legislation (PL 114-98) that authorized technical assistance support such an EPA decision and may write the Administrator requesting such a decision - something similar to this draft.
3. We believe the criteria in the authorized technical assistance (42 U.S.C.300j-l(e)) would allow for EPA to have a more obj ective and easier assessment of competing applicants for the funding. It would be simpler for EPA to request applicants to demonstrate to what degree does their application show "small community water systemsfind [it] to be the most beneficial and efifective." For example, see previous demonstrations of small community findings in Mississippi and Georgia.
4. And, we urge the Administrator to adopt a new initiative to increase the technical assistance support to rural and small communities by, for the first time, exploiting the 2 percent set-aide provision of the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund to dedicate upwards of $16 million for additional "help" versus regulation for rural and small town America. Such a new initiative could come with specific and documented environmental improvements for drinking water safety or compliance.
I will also follow-up on our thoughts on the proposed revisions to the Lead and Copper Rule early next week.
Thank you again and please contact any of us if we can be of any assistance.
Mike Keegan, Analyst National Rural W ater Association Washington, DC im & ceii:
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tier 5
ED 002061 00108030-00001