o
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington, DC 20460
December 1986
U.S. EPA
Nonpoint Source Strategy:
Agency wide and Regional
Strategies
FY 1986-87 Update
—• IPA
812/
1986.1
I
-------
-------
V
V
00
U.S. EPA
NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY:
AGENCYWIDE AND REGIONAL STRATEGIES
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
December, 198fi
U.S. Environsontal Protection
Library. Riosi 2'JO'V ??A-2ll-A
401 M Street. S.W.
Waanington. DC 20460
ENV1ROMMENTAL PROTECTION ASMOf
D.C. 20460
-------
wm IM
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Administrator's Overview
II. U.S. EPA Agencywide Nonpoint Source Strategy
III. U.S. EPA Regional Nonpoint Source Strategies
IV. Glossary of Acronyms
-------
-------
ADMINISTRATOR'S OVERVIEW
This Strategy presents what the Agency accomplished in FY 1986 and
will accomplish in FY 1987 to address nonpoint source (NPS) water pollu-
tion problems. This document contains both our Agencywide as well as
each of the EPA Regional NPS Strategies. These Strategies constitute
EPA's current program to redirect and mars hall its existing resources to
address NPS water pollution problems.
What's the Nature of the Problem
To gain some perspective on the NPS water pollution problem, we must
look back. Over the past decade we have mounted an enormous effort to
establish a system of industrial waste and sewage treatment facilities.
We have avoided the catastrophe that threatened our waters, and revived
many lakes and streams that had been thought beyond repair. We have made
much progress in addressing conventional pollutants from point sources
and are now emphasizing the task of controlling toxic point source pollu-
tants. But once we have finished these tasks the end of water pollution
will not be in sight.
In 1985 the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution
Control Administrators (ASIWPCA) completed a National assessment on NPS
water pollution. This Study reaffirmed that nonpoint pollution is a
major remaining water quality problem which will prevent the achievement
of established water quality goals, even when applicable point source
controls have been fully implemented. The Study reported the following
waters were either impaired or threatened by NPS pollution:
- 41 percent of the 404,000 assessed river miles;
- 53 percent of the 15 million assessed lake acres; and
- 28 percent of the 19,000 assessed estuary square miles.
The Study also reported NPS impacts on ground water including contamina-
tion from agricultural fertilizers and pesticides, septic systems, aban-
doned mines, and salt storage.
ASIWPCA's Study was based upon a detailed assessment conducted by
each of the States, territories and interstate agencies. It represents
the first comprehensive, consistent look at the Nation's NPS problems and
is a major milestone in our efforts to address this source of water
pollution. Other reports, such as State Section 305 (b) Water Quality
Reports and Regional Environmental Management Reports (EMR's) similarly
document the problems caused by NPS pollution.
Given the nature of the problem, significant reductions in nonpoint
pollutants will only come by improving the way we all manage our activi-
ties on the land. In a sense, NPS pollution is the footprint of our
the Bureau of Land •ManJ|emenf^nd1o^h^ips|it^c^mes 'tojjabout $10 billion.
In addition, as I've •'noted' already,'"the Tecieraly'government is directly
responsible for managing over 720 million acres of land. In these areas,
the Federal government is the "local" agency responsible for good stew-
ardship.
EPA's NPS Priorities
The Agencywide and Regional NPS Strategies list many of the specific
activities which we are undertaking to address nonpoint problems. Our
major emphasis will be in the following three areas:
-------
entire civilization, stamped on our water resources by the strength of
millions of separate private and public decisions. Each of these deci-
sions pursued some private and public good. Farmers wanted to grow more
crops. Cities expanded. People built highways between cities, and after
the highways were built they built surburban houses, filling up the
spaces between cities. This land development changed the pattern and
content of water runoff and percolation. Nonpoint pollution is the
direct result of that changed pattern.
What's Been Done and Where Are We Going
Fortunately, the nonpoint problem is being recognized in many
different parts of the Nation, by State and local governments and by the
private sector. States and localities are meeting their NPS challenges
by developing new programs and integrating NPS concerns into existing
programs. For example, States and localities in the Chesapeake Bay
Region, the Great Lakes Basin, the Tennessee Valley and elsewhere are
developing and implementing new NPS programs which will serve as models
for the rest of the Nation. These programs are being designed to respond
to the site-specific and source-specific management needs in the various
areas.
America's largest landowner, the Federal government, must also meet
its NPS challenges. The-Federal government is directly responsible for
managing over 720 million acres of land. A major thrust of EPA's NPS
Strategy is to help the major Federal land-holding agencies address non-
point problems in areas under their supervision. In addition, we intend
to continue to encourage Federal agencies to use their existing outreach
and assistance programs to complement State, local and private sector NPS
management efforts.
Rather than undertake a new big-money Federal nonpoint program, I
believe that we must redirect existing Federal, State, local and private
resources to priority nonpoint problems. To help us frame this approach,
EPA convened an interagency Nonpoint Source Task Force in 1984. The Task
Force recommended a new National policy on NPS pollution to protect sur-
face and ground water. Each Federal agency on the Task Force developed
its own nonpoint strategy, which they are now beginning to put into
effect. The Task Force strongly supported the idea that States and their
localities should play the leading role in the control of nonpoint sources,
and that private sector initiatives and cooperation are essential for
success.
Finally, the Task Force asked that EPA under its existing Clean
water Act authorities, take the lead at the Federal level, to coordinate
interagency management actions devoted to the control of such sources,
including needed actions on Federal lands.
This is what we intend to do. Coordination and refocusing of
existing resources are essential if we are to have a chance at all of
coping with this problem. These resources are in fact immense. When you
add up the money spent on resource management programs in FY 1985 by the
Corps of Engineers, the Soil Conservation Service, and the Forest Service,
-2-
develop technical information on effective approaches to targeting
NPS management programs and'an updated manual on best management
practices.
- EPA will encourage States and others to use the whole range of
implementation tools to manage NPS pollution problems e.g, infor-
mation, education, demonstrations, technical and financial assis-
tance, regulations, and enforcement. We will continue to share
information with States and others on effective approaches to NPS
problems and will encourage development of innovative approaches.
3. EPA will intensify its NPS activities and integrate NPS management
-------
U.S. EPA
AGENCYWIDE NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY
This U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Agencywide Nonpoint
Source (NPS) Strategy is an outgrowth of the efforts of the Federal/
State/Local NPS Task Force, created by EPA in 1984. The Task Force,
which includes representatives of Federal, State, and local agencies, was
created in recognition of the need to coordinate the activities of the
many diverse agencies involved in NPS management.
The NPS Task Force presented a recommended National Nonpoint Source
Policy to the EPA Administrator in December, 1984. Since then, most of
the agencies participating on the Task Force, including EPA, have offi-
cially endorsed this Policy. The objective of the National NPS Policy is
to support and accelerate the development and implementation of NPS
management programs. EPA fully supports this objective.
Thus, in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Policy, this EPA
Agencywide NPS Strategy describes general Agencywide NPS activities as
well as specific Headquarters activities we accomplished in FY 1986 and
will accomplish in FY 1987 to accelerate NPS management. In addition,
each EPA Region has developed its own Regional NPS Strategy identifying
specific tasks the Region intends to carry out.
The Agencywide Strategy is divided into the following sections,
corresponding with EPA's major responsibilities related to NPS control:
o Coordination With Federal Agencies
o Problem Assessment
o Program Implementation
o Incentives and Regulations
o Resources
(
o Program Evaluation and Oversight
EPA's major responsibilities in each of these areas are discussed below as
well as many specific activities and their target dates for completion.
-------
COORDINATION WITH FEDERAL AGENCIES
Based on its responsibilities and authorities under the Clean Water
Act, including Section 304 (k), EPA has the lead Federal agency role for
facilitating and coordinating Federal consistency in the management of NPS
water pollution. In FY 1986-1987, EPA will emphasize increased coordina-
tion with Federal agencies to assure maximum use of existing Federal
programs to accomplish NPS management objectives. EPA's interagency NPS
Task Force will continue to serve as a major vehicle for coordinating NPS
activities with other Federal agencies.
EPA Action
EPA will continue to provide the leadership
and staff support necessary for the continuing
activities of the Federal/State/Local Nonpoint
Source Task Force including its work groups:
- Water Quality Standards/Best Management
Practices Work Group: Work Group is devel-
oping guidance on the relationship of BMPs
and WQS and will publish this guidance as
an insert for the Water Quality Standards
Handbook (rewrite of SAM-32).
- NPS Assessment Work Group: Work Group is
developing an issue paper identifying
steps which can be taken to improve
future NPS assessments.
EPA will pursue negotiated memoranda of
understanding (MOUs) between EPA and several
key Federal agencies regarding NPS pollution
including SCS, USDA/NCSU, BLM, and DOD and
others, as appropriate. MOUs will be devel-
oped to help ensure maximum utilization of
existing Federal programs to achieve NPS man-
agement objectives. States will be encouraged
to amplify Federal-level MOUs with State-level
MOUS.
EPA will work with USDA to assure that maximum
NPS management results are achieved through
implementation of the new conservation
provisions in the 1985 Farm Bill e.g., the
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Sodbuster,
and Swampbuster provisions.
Date
Draft output: 12/85
3/86
7/86
Final output: 10/86
Draft output: 3/86
Final output: 10/86
SCS/Clean Lakes: 5/86
USDA/NCSU: 9/86
BLM: 6/87
DOD: 9/87
See next page
-2-
-------
EPA Action
- OW requested USOA's ASCS to amend the
preamble to the Interim rule for the CRP
to request comments on how the CRP can be
used to meet environmental concerns such
as off-site water quality Impacts.
- OEA/Office of Federal Activities
participated on an interagency workgroup
to develop regulations for implementing
the Sodbuster and Swampbuster programs.
- OEA/Office of Federal Activities will
coordinate EPA's activities and comments
on the implementing regulations for Title
XII of the 1985 Farm Bill e.g., CRP,
Sodbuster, and Swampbuster provisions.
- OW/NPS Branch will track CRP implementation
with a USDA provided data base.
EPA will encourage use of Inter-personnel
assignments to allow Federal, State, local
and other professionals to be assigned to
EPA offices and vice versa.
- OW sent a memo to EPA Regional
Administrators encouraging Regions to
establish USDA details to assist with
Regional NPS programs.
- OW/NPS Branch surveyed EPA Regions to
determine the number of USOA details in
Regional offices.
EPA will participate on a number of
interagency committees to assure adequate
consideration of NPS pollution problems and
control needs Including the following:
- Interagency Committee on Ground Water
- Forest Service Water Quality Workgroup
3/86 - 6/86
FY 86 - FY 87
Ongoing
Chesapeake Bay NPS Subcommittee (in
cooperation with Region III)
3/86
9/86
Meetings held or
scheduled:
3/86, 7/86
5/86, 6/86, 7/86
11/86, 2/87
- Interagency Subcommittee on Sedimentation Bimonthly meetings
2/86, 4/86, 8/86,
11/86, 12/86
-3-
-------
EPA Action
- TVA Water Quality Subcommittee (in
cooperation with Region IV)
- International Joint Commission NPS
Work Group (in cooperation with Great
Lakes National Program Office)
EPA will continue to use the Chesapeake Bay
and the Great Lakes Programs as models of
Federal agency coordination to address NPS
pollution problems.
EPA Regions 8, 9, and 10 held a workshop
with BLM representatives in Denver, Colorado
to develop better procedures for review of
BLM Resource Management Plans.
EPA Regions 8 and 10 met with U.S. FS Region
1 in Missoula, Montana to discuss WQS, fish
habitat, and antidegradation issues and to
consider organizing a Regional interagency
water quality committee.
EPA Regions 8, 9, and 10 will hold a workshop
with BLM and U.S. FS representatives on envir-
onmental indicators and cumulative impacts,
pending funding availability.
OPP/Integrated Pest Management/Program
Coordination Unit is working with several
Federal agencies on cooperative projects to
promote use of integrated pest management
(IPM):
.- OPP/IPM Unit is working with USOA's CSRS
and CES to develop cooperative demonstra-
tions on promising new IPM technologies.
For example, they are planning an IPM
turf management demonstration project in
Cape Cod, Massachusetts to minimize the
usage of chemical pesticides and their
appearance in ground water.
- OPP/IPM Unit and OEA/Office of Federal
Activities are working with USDA's APHIS
and other land management agencies as part
of an interagency effort to develop IPM
techniques to manage the range land grass-
hopper. Through the Environmental Review
Process OEA/Office of Federal Activities
Date
3/86, 9/86, 2/87
2/86
Ongoing
2/86
4/86
nr 87
Plan completed -
FY 87
5 year strategy
developed - 5/87
-4-
-------
EPA Action Date
Is also providing input into APHIS'S EIS
on their rangeland grasshopper control
program.
- OPP/IPM Unit is working with USDA in the Ongoing
development of strategies for a National
pesticide resistance monitoring network.
Such a network is important to identify
where IPM practices should be adopted as
part of pesticide resistance management
strategies.
- OPP/IPM Unit is working with USDA's ARS to Ongoing
identify IPM research needs based on the
needs of the FIFRA pesticide special review
process.
OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff, OPPE/Economic FY 86 - FY 87
and Regulatory Analysis Division, OW/NPS
Branch, and Region IV are working with TVA
and the State of Tennessee to evaluate inno-
vative approaches to point/nonpoint source
management in the TVA Region.
Each Federal agency is required by Section Updated plans due
313 of the Clean Water Act and Executive 12/86 and 6/87
Order 12088 to submit to OMB, through the EPA
Administrator, updated plans every six months
for the control of environmental pollution for
their facilities and land; NPS projects are
now included as activities to be reported in
such agency budgetary plans. OEA/Office of
Federal Activities, as required by the Clean
Water Act and the Executive Order, reviews
such plans and ensures progress is occurring.
OEA/Office of Federal Activities and EPA Ongoing
Regions incorporate NPS management concerns
in review of other agencies' actions under
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act.
OEA/Office of Federal Activities and EPA Ongoing
Regions incorporate NPS concerns in EPA's
review of the COE's public notices on
Section 404 discharges into wetlands; EPA
will work with other agencies to emphasize
the importance of wetland preservation.
-5-
-------
PROBLEM ASSESSMENT
Although other Federal, State, local, areawide, and interstate
agencies have the lead role in NFS problem assessment in areas within
their jurisdictions, EPA will continue to work in conjunction with these
agencies to help identify water quality problems, pollution sources, and
control needs. Agencies are encouraged to build upon the work done under
Sections 104, 106, 108, 205, 208, 303, and 314 of the Clean Water Act,
the Rural Clean Water Program, State Section 305 (b) water quality re-
ports, the ASIWPCA NPS Assessment, and other programs. In addition, EPA
will encourage all agencies to include monitoring/assessments of NPS
pollution problems in both surface and ground waters as part of their
annual work plans. EPA Regions will continue to work with States to
ensure that State Section 305 (b) reports contain adequate information on
NPS pollution including the extent of the problem and recommended control
programs. EPA involvement will include work and assistance in problem
identification, monitoring, data management and analysis, and research
and development.
Problem^Identification
EPA Action
!
6 OW/NPS Branch as a first step used the
ASIWPCA NPS Assessment data to provide water
quality assessments for the 1986 Resource
Conservation Act (RCA) inventory being pre-
pared by USOA. Secondly, the Branch com-
pared the ASIWPCA data with agricultural
and land use data in order to develop sta-
tistical assessment tools for the RCA.
;
o OW/NPS Branch and OW/Monitoring and Data
Support Division analyzed the NPS informa-
tion collected as part of the ASIWPCA NPS
Assessment to determine which measures would
be most appropriate to include in the 1986
water quality report to Congress.
o OW/Monitoring and Data Support Division and
OW/NPS Branch will evaluate the NPS informa-
tion submitted as a part of the 1986 State
Section 305 (b) reports for inclusion in the
1986 water quality report to Congress. In
addition, a data base is being developed
from these 305 (b) reports to track water
bodies with impairments due to point and
nonpoint sources and will be used to gen-
erate future 305 (b) reports.
Target Date
Step 1 completed
3/86
Step 2 completed
10/86
4/86
State reports due •
4/86
Report to Congress
due - 9/87
-6-
-------
EPA Action
Date
o As part of the guidance for the 1988 State
Section 305 (b) reports, the OW/Monitoring
and Data Support Division will provide
guidance to States on how to report NPS
problems to promote comparability of data.
o OW/Monitoring and Data Support Division,
OPPE, and OW/NPS Branch are developing a
screening procedure for evaluating nonpoint
sources in wasteload allocations.
o OW/Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection
provided grants to characterize point and
nonpoint source loadings to complete problem
identification activities in Buzzards Bay, Long
Island Sound, Narragansett Bay and Puget Sound.
In addition, grants were awarded for initial
planning and problem identification activities
for San Francisco Bay and Albemarle-Pamlico
Sounds.
o OPTS/Office of Toxic Substances gathered
information on the extent of ground-water
contamination from nonpoint sources such as
fertilizer use and septic tank additives.
o OW/Standards Branch and ORD will develop
sediment criteria which may be used in NPS
problem identification.
o EPA will continue to use the Environmental
Management Reports (EMR) process as a manage-
ment tool to identify areas where nonpoint
sources are a problem.
Monitoring and Data Management
EPA Action
o OW/NPS Branch will develop a NPS monitoring
and evaluation guide for use by the U.S. FS
and others.
o OW/NPS Branch will continue to develop and
document NPS data bases, and develop mechan-
isms to retrieve and utilize data related to
nonpoint.sources from other agencies.
Draft - 2/87
Final - 5/87
Draft- FY 87
FY 86 grants
awarded; FY 87
grants to be
awarded
Available data was
collected 1n FY 86
Draft criteria - 2nd
Qtr., FY 87
EMR's due: 4th Qtr.,
FY 86
Target Date
Draft - 12/86
-7-
-------
EPA Action
i
- OW/NPS Branch will continue to document
the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP)
data through a grant to Illinois Water
Survey to make the data available to all
users.
• OW/NPS Branch will develop a data base which
identifies waters not impacted by point
sources and possibTy~~impacted by nonpoint
sources and analyze this information. The
process is to develop stream, lake and
ground-water data bases.
- OW/NPS Branch made Agricultural Census,
Conservation Tillage Information Center, and
Natural Resource Inventory data available on
computer for use by EPA .Regions and others
in assessing NPS impacts.
OW/NPS Branch will continue to suport North
Carolina State University (NCSU) staff in the
development and use of their NPS data bases.
For example, the Branch is assisting NCSU in
getting the Rural Clean Water Projects to put
their water quality data into STORET.
OW's NPS Branch and Monitoring and Data
Support Division are updating the Reach File
across the U.S. to assist in point and NPS
analysis and data management and are seeking
additional funds to complete the project.
The Office of Pesticide Programs and OW/Office
of Drinking Water will conduct a National Sur-
vey of Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells.
Approximately 5 dozen pesticides, as well as
nitrates, will be sampled as part of the survey.
The survey design and development of analytical
methodologies was essentially completed in FY
1986; sampling of a pilot area (3 States) will
begin in the spring of 1987; the full survey
will begin in the fall of 1987; and sampling
and analysis are tentatively scheduled through
the beginning of FY 1989.
OW/Office of Ground-Water Protection, in
cooperation with other program offices, will con-
duct several studies and issue guidance related
to ground-water monitoring and data management:
Date
Complete - 12/86
Draft stream data ,
base completed -
9/86
Other draft data
bases - 4th Qtr., FY 87
4th Qtr., FY 86
FY 86 - FY 89
1/86 - 6/88
FY 86 - FY 89
-8-
-------
EPA Action
- A "Ground-Water Monitoring Strategy" was
issued.
- A manual on "Ground4later Data Management
With STORE!" was issued.
- A study will be completed on ground-water
data management needs.
o OPTS/Office of Pesticide Programs will develop
separate guidelines for monitoring pesticides
in ground and surface waters.
o OPTS/Office of Pesticide Programs, in
cooperation with other program offices, will
continue implementing the National Pesticide
Monitoring Plan which involves systematically
collecting available information on the extent
of pesticide residues in water resources.
Research. Demonstration, and Development
EPA Action
o ~EPA will support the development, evaluation
and implementation of new innovative ap-
proaches to NPS management. For example:
- OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff and OPPE/
Economic and Regulatory Analysis Division
completed their Chesapeake Bay study
examining potential sites in the drainage
basin (i.e., Micomico River) for demon-
strating the optimization approach to
phosphorus management between point and
nonpoint sources.
- OPPE/Office of Regulatory Reform will
complete an institutional analysis of the
point and nonpoint source control programs
in Virginia and will try to identify a site
for a point/nonpoint source optimization
project.
- OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff, OPPE/Economic
and Regulatory Analysis Division and CM
staff will complete a report comparing the
costs and removal effectiveness of agricul-
tural BMPs and POTWs for controlling phos-
phorus in the Great Lakes region.
3/86
12/86
Ground water - 9/87
Surface water - 9/88
Ongoi ng
Date
9/86
12/86
12/86
-9-
-------
EPA Action Date
- OPPE/Office of Regulatory: Reform and CM/ 9/86
Office of Ground-Water Protection developed
a case study on an innovative approach to
ground-water protection through septic
system management in Idaho.
ORD is not conducting any direct NPS research, Ongoing
however, they have a variety, of research
efforts which are related to: NPS pollution
problems including research on pesticide fate/
transport, aquatic eco-regio'ns, etc.
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
EPA will continue to encourage all government agencies to integrate
NPS management concerns into their existing programs and to develop new
implementation programs as needed. A major thrust of the Strategy is to
work with Federal agencies to better utilize existing implementation
programs to address NPS control needs (additional activities are also
included in the section of the Strategy on Coordination With Federal
Agencies).
EPA expects States, Territories, and Indian Tribes, in cooperation
with appropriate levels of government and the private sector, to take the
lead in developing NPS management programs for priority waters (ground
and surface waters). EPA will provide guidance and assistance to States
and others for developing and implementing effective NPS management pro-
grams. Assistance will be provided for: setting priorities for remedial
and preventive management efforts for specific priority waters; NPS pro-
gram development/management; targeting NPS management efforts; and NPS/
point source optimization. EPA's approach will be to support and utilize
existing delivery systems wherever possible.
EPA encourages States, Territories, Indian Tribes and others to
identify NPS pollution problems and to work actively to develop and imple-
ment management programs through their ongoing water quality management
program. Water quality management agencies can use available funding from
Clean Water Act sections 104, 106, 108, 205 and 314 to fund NPS management
efforts. In addition, EPA will continue to provide assistance for water
bodies of National significance such as the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay
and other major estuaries, and to use these efforts as models for NPS
program development.
-10-
-------
Program Planning, Development, and Implementation
EPA Action
OH/NPS Branch will continue to participate on
the National Coordinating Committee for the
Rural Clean Water Program (RCVIP) including
providing annual review of the 21 projects
and on the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC)
to guide the North Carolina State University
National Water Quality Evaluation Project in
their evaluation of the RCWP and other NPS
projects. EPA Regions will continue to pro-
vide annual review of the RCWP projects in
their respective Regions and to participate
on the State Coordinating Committees and Local
Coordinating Committees for RCWP projects.
OW/Office of Ground-Water Protection, pursuant
to the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of
1986, will develop guidance for implementing
the Wellhead Protection Program and Sole Source
Aquifer Demonstration Program. Management
plans developed by the States for these pro-
grams will address nonpoint sources as well as
other sources of pollution.
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) and OW/
Office of Ground-Water Protection issued a
report of the EPA Pesticides-in-Ground-Water
Working Group and a summary of State pesti-
cides-in-ground-water activities.
EPA will obtain public review of draft
guidance on classifying ground water
according to use and vulnerability.
OPP/Integrated Pest Management and Program
Coordination Unit is working with the State of
California to include integrated pest manage-
ment and resistance management components in
a Section 18, FIFRA Emergency Exemption request.
It is hoped that this will serve as a model for
other States.
OPTS/Office of Toxic Substances and OW/Office
of Ground-Water Protection, in cooperation with
other EPA program and Regional offices, com-
pleted and began implementing the TSCA Ground-
Water Strategy which addresses selected toxic
substance contamination of ground water including
fertilizers and cleaning additives for septic
systems.
Date
PAC meetings - .Quarterly
EPA annual review of
RCWP projects - 1/86
and 1/87
RCWP project meetings -
7/86, 7/87
5/87
5/86
2nd Qtr., FY 87
FY 86 - FY 87
Strategy completed
12/85
-11-
-------
EPA Action Date
,
- OPTS/Office of Toxic Substances will develop Draft - 11/86
guidance for internal use in the new chemical
program (Premanufacture Notice Program) and
existing chemical program on how to better
assess in routine exposure assessments the
potential for ground-water contamination
from such chemicals.
o OPPE/Off ice of Management Systems and Evaluation 1st Qtr., F:Y 87
will continue to work cooperatively with EPA
program and Regional offices to develop 10-year
strategic plans to address a number of issues
related to NPS including near coastal waters,
agricultural chemicals in ground water, and wet-
lands protection. These strategic plans will
identify problems, suggest alternative achievable
environmental results, and eventually result in
development of implementation strategies.
o OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff and OW/NPS Branch 5/86
developed a "generic briefing" for use in
explaining point/nonpoint source optimization
to EPA Regions and others.
o CW/Advanced Treatment (AT) Task Force will Ongoing
continue to address NPS loads and effects as
appropriate in AT reviews for nutrient removal
at POTW's.
:
o OW/Office of Water Enforcement and Permits Ongoing
and EPA Regions will continue to use the
existing NPDES permit process and related
existing effluent guidelines when appropri-
ate for requiring BMPs to control runoff at
industrial sites; OW/NPS Branch will continue
to provide assistance regarding assessing
the quality of stormwater runoff.
o OW/Industrial Technology Division will Ongoing
continue to evaluate the adequacy of BMP
measures in place in new and previously
promulgated effluent guidelines.
o EPA will continue to use the Environmental Ongoing
Review Process to incorporate NPS-related
concerns into U.S. FS and BLM Resource
Management Plans and will provide follow-up
support as necessary.
-12-
-------
Targeting
EPA Action
o EPA will respond to requests for assistance
in targeting NPS management programs for
priority waters. In addition, OU/NPS
Branch and OPPE/Economic and Regulatory
Analysis Division will work with North
Carolina State University (NCSU) to develop
and issue guidance on approaches for target-
ing NPS management programs.
o EPA will.continue to encourage USDA's ASCS
to emphasize special projects involving
water quality in their Agricultural Conser-
vation Program (ACP).
Technical Assistance/Education
EPA Action
o EPA published an issue of the EPA Journal
devoted to the topic of "Tackling Nonpoint
Water Pollution."
o QW/NPS Branch cosponsored an International
Symposium on Applied Lake and Watershed
Management in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin,
November 13-16, 1985; proceedings were
published. OW/NPS Branch will cosponsor
an International Symposium on Lake and
Reservoir Management in Portland, Oregon.
o OW/NPS Branch issued a report on the
accomplishments of the Clean Lakes Program,
including NPS aspects.
o OW/NPS Branch developed an urban retention
design manual for use by local practitioners
titled "Methodology for Analysis of Detention
Basins for Control of Urban Runoff Quality."
o OW/NPS Branch will develop a manual for
decision-makers describing existing NPS
models and BMPs.
o OW/NPS Branch cosponsored the Fifth
International Symposium on Agricultural
Wastes in Chicago, Illinois.
Date
Cooperative agreement
with NCSU: 3/86 - 11/86
ACP special project
funds available - 3/87
Proceedings published
4th Qtr., FY 86 .
Portland Symposium -
11/5-8/86
5/86
9/86
Draft - 10/86
Final - 12/86
12/16-17/85
-13-
-------
EPA Action
Date
OW/NPS Branch cosponsored a conference on
urban runoff quality in Henniker, N.H. with
the Engineering Foundation, June 22-27, 1986;
proceedings will be published.
OW/NPS Branch assisted the Great Lakes
National Program Office in organizing a
workshop on "Conservation Tillage - Envir-
onmental Impact on Surface and Ground Water,"
June 10-12, 1986.
OW/NPS Branch will provide introductory
training to EPA Regional and State staff on
the use of the Reach File and the NPS data
base and methods for updating these data bases.
i
OW/Office of Ground-Water Protection
developed and issued technical information
and model ordinances on septic systems.
OW/Office of Ground-Water Protection, in
.cooperation with other EPA Program and Regional
Offices, will develop technical information on
BMPs to protect ground water from pesticide
contamination.
OPTS/Certification and Training Program will
provide support to the States of New York and
California to develop a unit on ground-water
protection for incorporation into State pesti-
cide applicator training programs.
OEA/Office of Federal Activities and OW/Office
of Municipal Pollution Control cosponsored a
conference on Aquatic Plants for Water Treat-
ment and Resource Recovery in Orlando, Florida
which included the impact of wetlands on NPS
pollutant removal.
OW/NPS Branch and EPA Regional staff will
continue to assist the National Association
of State Departments of Agriculture (NASOA)
with their NPS project designed to document
and disseminate information on successful NPS
projects in the Great Lakes region.
OW/Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection
will complete development of procedural
guidance on conducting estuarine protection
programs including information related to
NPS program development.
Proceedings published
2nd Qtr., FY 87
Proceedings published
1st Qtr., FY 87
FY 87 - FY
7/86
FY 87
4/87
7/20-24/86
Cooperative agreement
with NASDA -
4/86 - 10/87
Draft - 10/86
-14-
-------
EPA Action
Date
OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff provided technical
assistance to the Denver Regional Council of
Governments, the State of Colorado, and EPA
Region 8 to develop the Cherry Creek pollution
reduction trading program.
OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff, OPPE/Economic
and Regulatory Analysis Division and OW/NPS
Branch will continue to seek to identify
"natural experiments" and provide assistance
to various communities/States where there is
a need to consider and evaluate the NPS/point
source optimization approach as a viable alter*
native to nutrient management. In addition,
guidelines will be developed for assessing
NPS/point source optimization projects.
OPPE/Regulatory Reform Staff will complete a
literature survey on the effectiveness of
nonstructural BMPs for reducing sediment in
runoff and assess the relationship between
sediment in runoff and P and N concentrations.
Project Approved by
State of Colorado on
12/85 and by EPA
Region 8 on 7/86
Draft Guidelines -
4th Qtr., FY 87
Draft - 12/85
Final - 5/86
INCENTIVES AND REGULATIONS
Currently, both voluntary and regulatory programs are being used to
manage NPS impacts. EPA believes that voluntary NPS management programs
are valuable and that incentives are sometimes necessary to increase the
scope of implementation and improve the equity of such programs. Volun-
tary programs, however, need to include effective program evaluation com-
ponents. Where nonpoint source-related water quality goals are not being
met after an adequate period of voluntary program implementation, regula-
tory programs may be necessary, and States and localities should consider
developing and implementing such programs. Where regulatory programs are
used, adequate enforcement mechanisms should be developed to ensure com-
pliance with program requirements.
While a variety of Incentive and enforcement tools may be used to
achieve compliance or implementation of NPS BMPs, it is important to note
that EPA currently has few legal authorities under the Clean Water Act to
require implementation of NPS BMPs. Section 313 of the Clean Water Act
and Executive Order 12088 address Federal facilities compliance with
State, interstate or local water pollution control requirements including
the control of NPS pollution. Also, stormwater runoff that is "channeli-
zed" by means of "discrete conveyances" located in urbanized areas or at
industrial or commercial facilities falls under the purview of the NPDES
point source permit program and requires permits (see 49 FR 37997,
September 26, 1984). For the past few years EPA has been considering
revisions to these regulations (see 50 FR 9362, March 7, 1985, and 50 FR
32548, August 12, 1985 for proposed regulations). A final regulation on
-15-
-------
stormwater permit application requirements is expected by the beginning
of 1987. The deadlines for stormwater permit applications where EPA is
the permit issuing authority have'been extended to 1987 and 1989 (see 50
FR 35200, August 29, 1985). ;
Many States and local governments have adopted regulatory programs
including enforcement options for' some types of nonpoint sources. NPS
pollution from construction erosion, mining activities, and pesticide; use
are the most common types of nonpoint sources for which States/locals have
adopted regulatory programs. About one-fourth of the States have regula-
tory programs for forestry activities; these programs vary widely among
States. Agricultural NPS problems-1 are currently primarily addressed with
voluntary programs; in some instances, back-up regulatory provisions have
either been adopted or considered. Only a few States and/or local govern-
ments have adopted stormwater management regulatory programs, directed at
stormwater runoff from new developments.
Incentives
EPA Action Date
o - EPA will continue to make existing Clean Water Ongoing
Act resources under Sections 104, 106, 108, 205,
and 314 available to localities for NPS manage-
ment activities in priority waters.
o EPA will continue, to encourage States to develop Ongoing
incentive programs to share the cost of imple-
menting BMPs i.e., cost sharing, loan programs,
tax incentives, etc.
o EPA, in cooperation with cither agencies, will Ongoing
assess and provide information about the econ-
omic benefits to landowners and operators of
BMP emplacement.
Regulations
EPA Action Date
o OPP/Integrated Pest Management and Program Ongoing
Coordination Unit is increasing consideration
of integrated pest management strategies in
the development of regulatory options for
special review pesticides.
o OW/Office of Water Enforcement and Permits will Draft - 12/85
explore and define other alternatives which Final - 11/86
might be legally adaptable and implementable
under the current Clean Water Act for managing
water quality e.g., they will develop final
guidance on general permits including general
permits for stormwater.
-16-
-------
EPA Action Date
o EPA, and agencies administering EPA delegated Ongoing
programs, will continue to require use of NPS
BMPs in EPA supported construction projects
e.g., such as the Construction Grants Program,
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Program, etc.
o EPA will continue to enforce Section 404 Ongoing
permitting requirements for discharges into
wetlands important for control of NPS pollu-
tants.
RESOURCES
EPA's Office of Water will assume the lead role within the Agency
for coordinating implementation of the EPA NPS Strategy. EPA will use
existing funding under the Clean Water Act to assist State and local
governments in program implementation. In addition, EPA will encourage
other Federal agencies to utilize their existing resources and programs
to accomplish NPS management objectives.
A variety of funding sources are available under the Clean Water
Act for managing NPS pollution including Section 104, 106, 108, 205, and
314 funds: .
- Section 104 (b)(3) funds are available for a variety of Great
Lakes water quality projects including assessing NPS problems
and evaluating/implementing NPS controls; these funds also
support NPS implementation activities and various water quality
assessment projects for the Chesapeake Bay Program and problem
assessment activities for other selected estuaries.
- Section 106 funds support the administration of water quality
management programs and may be used for developing and managing
NPS programs; however, 106 funds are not to be used for direct
financial assistance to individuals for implementing NPS controls,
except for demonstration projects. Section 106 funds are also
available to develop ground-water protection programs, including
programs to address contamination of ground water from nonpoint
sources.
- Section 108 has provided funding for NPS demonstration projects
in the watersheds of the Great Lakes. Conservation tillage prac-
tices are being demonstrated in 33 counties in the Great Lakes
Basin as a means of reducing nutrient loads to Lakes Erie and
Ontario.
- Section 205 (j) funds have been available to support NPS planning
activities such as updates of water quality management plans but
may not be used for direct implementation activities.
-17-
-------
- Section 314-funds can be used for direct financial assistance to
Individuals for implementing NPS controls to protect/improve lake
water quality.
EPA Action Date
o EPA will increase priority of NPS management Ongoing
within limitations of existing and future
available funds in Sections 104, 106, 108,
205, and 314.
o EPA will better utilize available professional Ongoing
staff to manage and carry out EPA's responsi-
bilities identified in this Strategy and en-
courage existing staff to take training
courses on all aspects of NPS management.
o EPA will work with other Federal agencies to Ongoing
better integrate NPS management concerns into
existing programs.
PROGRAM EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT
While all agencies are individually responsible for the periodic
evaluation of their programs, EPA will include such evaluations in its
assessment of NPS management efforts in determining if National water
quality goals are being adequately addressed. To meet the goals and ob-
jectives of the Clean Water Act, EPA will oversee implementation of State
water quality programs through its accountability system and through
program review of activities by the Regions. EPA's Agency Operating
Guidance clearly identifies NPS management as an Agency priority and
establishes realistic performance expectations.
EPA Action Date
o OW/NPS Branch will work with OW to evaluate FY 86 - FY 87
the need to suggest statutory changes related
to NPS management in the Clean Water Act
reauthorization bills.
o EPA will include specific items on NPS Ongoing
pollution as part of the Agency's Strategic
Planning and Management System (SPMS) and the
Office of Water Accountability System (OWAS).
o As part of EPA's CWA oversight role, OW/NPS Ongoing
Branch will assess and evaluate EPA Regional
and State NPS programs for consistency with
SPMS and OWAS guidance at!mid- and end-of-year
reviews and as part of other management reviews
as they occur.
-18-
-------
EPA Action
EPA will evaluate use by States of Section
104, 106, 108, 205, and 314 funds for NPS
management to ensure consistency with
National guidance.
EPA will evaluate and Integrate the Ongoing
experiences of Its Regional offices and
State, areawide, and local NPS programs,
and use the results to refine and modify
the Agency Strategy and direction.
•19-
-------
-------
U.S. EPA
REGIONAL NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGIES
-------
-------
REGION I FY'86/FY'87 NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY
Objective;
Develop program, work plan, and coordination wdthin EPA, with
States/localities, and with the public to implement the National
Nonpoint source Policy and Strategy in Region I. In particular,
give special attention to gaps in urban runoff, agricultural
chemicals and land disposal (including toxics and cumulative
impacts), especially with respect to groundwater protection.
Carry out prototype programs to focus NFS measures on environmen-
tally sensitive geographic areas: Narragansett and Buzzards
Bays, Cape Cod Aquifer, lake watersheds, and critical wetlands.
Activities:
1. Promote and carry out regional strategy within EPA, with
States/localities, and with the public. Refine strategy in
January and July.
^2. Work with the States to develop, refine, or update State NPS
Management Programs — including implementation steps, prior-
ities, responsibilities, funding, and supporting Federal
Actions. State NPS Management Programs are called for in
National NPS Strategy, EPA Operating Guidance and Strategic
Planning and Management Systems (SPMS), and in pending CWA
amendments. - NPS Coord, and WQM staff, March/April 1986 and
October 1986. .
0 Incorporate Regional NPS Priorities for NPS strategy in
guidance and reviews for State program grants (106, 205(j),
205(g) and for WQM Activities (303(e) and 305(bj) - Program
Coords.
0 Evaluate State progress and needs during Mid-Year Reviews
and follow-up sessions.
0 Arrange assistance, as needed.
0 Evaluate and assist States to strengthen 305(b)/ASIWPCA
NPS Assessments. - 305(b), NPS, and Groundwater Coords.
"3. Arrange Federal agency assistance to meet State needs and car-
ry out NPS strategy:
0 Continue and follow-up on series of State-by-State coordina-
tion meetings with USDA officials, State Agricultural/Water
Quality Commissioners, and EPA.
0 Evaluate and assist the two Region I Rural Clean Water Proj-
ects (RCWP), Small Watershed Program Land Treatment Projects
(PL566), and special Agricultural Conservation Program
(ACP) Projects. Coordinate with Clean Lakes, Estuarine
studies, and Groundwater programs.
'Priority effort
-------
-2-
* Work with ACP on cost-sharing priorities for water quality -
NFS Coord., Continuing
0 Work with the States and USDA to include water quality
criteria in designation of critical lands to go into "Con-
servation Reserve" under the 1985 Farm Bill. - NFS Coord.,
March. 1986.
0 Involve Cooperative Extension Service in water quality NFS
education efforts. Contact Headquarters and State Exten-
sion offices - NFS Coord., Continuing.
9 Work with Federal and State Highway/Water Quality officials
on construction, deicing materials and other highway road
runoff issues. Coordinate with Water Supply Branch and
Groundwater office.
Steps:
- Using Connecticut as prototype, explore issues with
Connecticut DOT and DEP - NFS Coord., April 1986.
- Follow-up with Headquarters and Federal DOT, and with
other States, as appropriate. NFS Coord., May 1986.
4. Co-sponsor policy and technical workshops to meet States'
needs, identified during Mid-year Reviews and in 305{b)/
. ASIWPCA Assessment. Promote technical transfer - Groundwater,
Pesticides, NPDES and NFS Coords. ",
0 Explore workshop on transfer of findings to-date from St.
Albans RCWP and LaPlatte Watershed Projects, with University
of Vermont and SCS. r NFS Coord., possibly 7/86.
':• '• h
' ) t •
0 Organize workshop(s):;on urban runoff (stormwater) problem,
control measures, beginning wth EPA staff discussion - NFS
NPDES, and Groundwater Coords., March 1986.
0 Participate in National Conference on Urban Runoff, En-
gineering Council, Henniker, NH, 6/22-27, 1986 - NFS, Per-
mits and Groundwater Coords.
0 Follow-up with stormwater Runoff Workshop if needed. - NFS
Coord., et.al. , w/NEIWPC, Fall 1986. '
0 Arrange workshop on^agricultural chemicals and ground and
surface waters/w/NEIWPC - Groundwater Coord. Fall '86.
Work with Headquarters on pesticides/groundwater training
program for Extension agents, dealers, etc. - Pesticides
and Groundwater Coords., F,? '87'.
* * i
* Conduct workshop witrh States and NEIWPC on septic system/
septage regulations in relation to groundwater, with empha-
sis on toxics and planning/zoning densities - Groundwater
and NFS Coord. 1987; Cosppnsor Conference on on-site
Sewage Disposal, 3/31-4/1.
-------
5. Promote information exchange and dissemination. Give presen-
tations - NFS Coord, and WQM staff, Continuing.
6. Develop prototype NFS programs as part of Estuarine Studies -
NFS and Estuarine Coords., Continuing.
0 Coordinate Narragansett Bay Study with Aquidneck
Island Erosion and Sediment Control Study by SCS
emphasizing Agricultural Chemicals/Sediments.
0 Develop prototype urban runoff, on-site disposal, and
agricultural NFS and control programs for problem
embayments; e.g., upper Narragansett Bay, Buttermilk
Bay, Westport Estuary and Quinnipiac Estuary.
7. integrate NFS Program into Cape Cod aquifer management program.
- Groundwater and NFS Coord., Continuing,
0 Evaluate land use policies for aquifer protection
zones, April 1986.
0 Target NFS programs, as needs identified, Fall 1986,
continuing.
8. Complete or continue Clean Lakes projects with joint SCS/
ACP funding. Give attention to on-site systems and erosion/
sediment/runoff controls for Candlewood Lake, Ct. - Clean
Lakes and NFS Coords.
9. Identify and predesignate wetlands that protect priority
waters from NFS runoff of seepage under Sec. 404(c) or Ad-
vance Identification of Sites. Tie in with Bay Studies and
Cape Cod Aquifer geographic prototypes - Wetlands and NFS
Coords, and States, FY186-87.
10. Incorporate NFS controls in Sole Source Aquifer Protection
program. - sole Source Aquifer Coord., FY'87.
11. Explore feasibility and develop prototype general permits
for stormwater runoff (especially lead and other heavy metals),
once toxics-based NPDES permits have been issued. Use Ten
Mile, Patuxent, and Pawtucket Rivers as prototypes. Explore
feasibility and develop prototype general permits for storm-
water runoff in drinking water supply watersheds. - Permits
Branch, FY'87.
12. Review effectiveness of on-site BMP's in NPDES Program.
Strengthen as needed. - Permits Branch FY186-87.
-------
-4-
13. Cooperate with Headquarters in its evaluation of the effec-
tiveness of erosion control requirements in the Construc-
tion Grant Program. Coordinate with Regional Wetlands
Strategy. - Municipal, Facilities Branch, FY186-87
14. Review and strengthen NFS protection programs on Federal
installations under Executive Order 12088 - Federal Activi-
ties and NFS Coords. Continuing.
15. Evaluate NFS impacts and proposed preventive measures in
Federal land and water management plans and in the course
of Environmental Reviews under NEPA and FERC - NFS Coord.,
Environmental Review Coord., and WQM staff, Continuing.
Examples:
- U.S. Forest Service, White Mountain National Forest
Plan (under revision, FY'86) and Green Mountain
National Forest Plan, March, 1986.
- Big "A" Hydroelectric Power Dam Application, West
Branch of Penobscott River, Maine.
- Highway projects; e.g., Route 6 across Scituate
Reservoir, Rhode Island.
- Coastal Zone Management Programs; e.g., New Hampshire.
16. secure priority for NFS activities in Federal and Federal-
assistance programs in New England Governors1 Conference
1986 Priorities Report to the Congress and Federal/State
Aency Heads - NFS Coord., October, 1985.
17. Evaluate institutional arrangements to anticipate cumulative
impact of development on water quality, including meeting
antidegradation requirements and policy on BMP's Water Qual-
ity Standards; e.g., NFS Task Force-on BMP's water quality
standards; Vermont Legislation and Regulations. - NFS and
Water Quality Standards, Coords., January, April, and
continuing.
18. Evaluate significance of acid deposition on NFS loadings
in critical lakes and streams, in conjunction with National
Surface Waters Survey - NFS Coord, and BSD, June 1986 and
periodically.
19. Define data management requirements for NFS - Data Management,
NFS and 305(b) Coords., Continuing.
20. Evaluate progress and integrate into WQMIS tracking and
information systems or into existing micro-computer project
tracking package - Program and Data Management Coords.,
Semi-annually.
-------
REGION II NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY
INTRODUCTION
The problem of nonpoint source (NPS) pollution and its importance to the
achievement and maintenance of water quality goals has been, and is,
clearly recognized. Major planning work for nonpoint source pollution
in Region II was accomplished under the Clean Water Act. Under Section
208 of the Act, $47 million was spent between 1975 and 1984 in Region II
for local and statewide water quality assessments, point and nonpoint
source control programs, and groundwater management programs {$6 million).
By 1980, 13 areawide and 4 statewide initial plans were developed and
conditionally approved.. Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and most
recently New Jersey and New York State have provided updates to their
initial statewide plans. The initial plan topics were:
- Municipal treatment needs {sewer service areas, population projections)
- Local On-Lot Systems Programs
- Statewide Agricultural Programs
- Statewide Construction Sediment Programs
- Local Groundwater Management.
The implementation of plans, programs, and activities recommended by the
Section 208 nonpoint source studies serves as the foundation for Region II
efforts. Inclusion of the nonpoint source element is emphasized in
ongoing Clean Water Act programs, including Clean Lakes, and in new programs
such as the Long Island Sound Study. The complete bibliography of Region
II Section 208 funded projects has been scheduled for computerization.
This will permit rapid retrieval of information on a specific topic.
Our major current attention is directed to follow-up on the recommended
National Nonpoint Source Policy for maximizing the water quality benefits
from Federal and State agricultural programs. The Regional Administrator
has personally initiated this effort with appropriate Federal and State
agency directors.
Region II activities, consistent with available resources, will continue
to support the national EPA strategy for nonpoint source control.
- 1 -
-------
REGION II NONPOIOT SOURCE (NFS) STRATEGY
OBJECTIVE: The goal of the Region II NFS Strategy is to have operating
state nonpoint source implementation programs, where control
measures are implemented in the highest priority watersheds.
The regional nonpoint source program should include:
0 An interagency committee that meets regularly,
0 A consensus from the committee that specific water quality
problems exist and are a priority for correction,
0 General agreement on the nature of the source of the pollutants,
0 Commitment of resources from very specific interagency pro-
grams to reach'a ccmmon goal,
0 Restoration of designated uses resulting through the implement-
ation of controls, and improved water quality as evidenced
through assessment.
STRATEGY: The following series of activities need to be performed in
order to most effectively meet the goal.
0 Regularly update nonpoint source assessments.
- Provide guidance to states to ensure the Water Quality Assessment
Section 305(b) Report addresses nonpoint sources of pollution including:
- The nature and extent of nonpoint source pollution,
- Identification of waters impacted by nonpoint source pollution
and waters needing protection front nonpoint sources of: pollution,
- Nonpoint Source priority areas.
0 Identify priority watersheds for NFS controls.
- In each state, continue coordination with Federal, State, and
local [agricultural] agencies to reach agreement on priority water-
sheds, based on mutually agreeable criteria, including use impair-
ment.
- Ensure states identify ranked priority areas through annual assessments
[Section 305(b) Report].
- Through technology transfer to the states, increase the visibility
of nonpoint source impacts through the inclusion of nonpoint source
pollution, where feasible, in loading analyses and wasteload allocation
studies.
- 2 -
-------
0 Reach consensus on the source of the pollutants and the necessary
controls*
- Have Federal, State, and local [agricultural] agencies reach consensus
on: pollutants of concern, sources of pollutants, control programs,
and the level of control necessary.
0 Inventory existng agricultural water quality programs to fund these
activities.
9
- Increase and improve communication between agricultural agencies
and environmental agencies to encourage better use of existing
funds and greater water quality benefits.
- Have State nonpoint source strategies inventory all existing nonpoint
source programs.
° Identify barriers (institutional, financial, technical) to the implementation
of controls, develop solutions, and resolve them.
- Continue work with agricultural agencies to identify the barriers which
exist to the implementation of controls, suggest solutions to remove
these barriers and coordinate efforts to resolve them.
° Implementand track control program.
- Implement controls through existing programs in coordination with
the agricultural agencies and work to determine mechanisms to track
implementation based upon existing USDA and USEPA tracking systems.
Evaluate and update control programs.
- Evaluation of the control program is ultimately based upon changes
in water ouality through assessment.
- Participation and cooperation are also used to evaluate program.
..- Update program with an interagency caimittee that meets at least
• \ quarterly.
_ 3 _
-------
ACTIVITIES/OUTPUTS of NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM
JANUARY - MARCH 1986
0 Award of "discretionary" Section 106 funding to New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection for education/demonstration program in
the Na.vesink Watershed.
0 Award of "discretionary" Section 106 funding to Puerto Rico Environ-
mental Quality Board for Animal Waste Control Program.
0 Begin implementation of Puerto Rico 106 project.
0 Review proposal for phase II of INFORM1s Hudson River Study:
Research of River Conditions, Nonpoint Pollution Problem.
0 Review of documents prepared by the New York State Department of Environ-
mental Conservation updating the State Water Quality Management Plan.
0 Review Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board North Metro 208 Project.
APRIL - JUNE 1986
0 Review state Section 305(b) water quality assessment reports.
8 Conduct mid-year reviews with states, concentrating on State NPS
program progress, status, and nonpoint source problems and issues.
0 EPA/USDA/State nonpoint source meeting with New York.
0 EPA/USDA/State nonpoint source meeting with New Jersey.
0 Attendance of Nonpoint Source Coordinator at course on groundwater
contamination, sponsored by the Region's Office of Groundwater.
July - September1986
0 Begin implementation of New Jersey 106 project.
0 Participate in review of Agricultural Conservation Program arid
the Emergency Conservation Program.
8 Review of Long Island Sound Study findings on sources of toxic
contaminants with emphasis on the urban runoff, agricultural ,
and combined sewer overflow components.
0 Review INFORM's draft report on nonpoint sources of pollution in the
Hudson River.
0 EPA/USDA/State nonpoint source meeting in Caribbean.
0 Evaluate/implement securing detail from the USDA Soil Conservation Service
to assist in the implementation of the Regional Nonpoint Source Strategy.
0 Review New York State Strategy for Phosphorus Reduction to Lake Erie and
Lake Ontario.
- 4 -
-------
l
f-SI
*; •:*
1-^
Si
A, •• ',„**»
» . i —»
Ongoing Activities (FY 86 and FY 87)
0 Promote and carry out Regional Strategy within EPA, with states, localities
and public. Revise strategy as necessary.
0 Review and strengthen NPS protection programs on Federal installations.
0 Evaluate NPS impacts and proposed preventive measures in the course of
envirormental reviews under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
0 Evaluate states' policy/technical needs identified during Midyear Reviews
and 305{b} Reports.
0 Continue coordination* with Federal Agencies to assist states in developing/
updating their NPS strategies, including,
- Soil Conservation Service
- Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
- Cooperative Extension
- Forest Service
- Fanner's Home Administration
- Food and Drug Administration
0 Participate in Great Lakes National Program Office activities related
to phosphorus reduction activities in New York State.
0 Review State Water Quality Management grant-(106, 205(j), 205(g)) applications
to ensure .EPA Operating Guidance and Strategic Planning and Management System
activities are addressed, and that priorities are addressed.
0 Assist states in the development, implementation, evaluation and updating
of State Nonpoint Source Management programs and strategies.
0 Review progress of computerization of 208 document bibliography.
* Develop data management system for nonpo'int source assessments/activities.
0 Review of state water quality management plan updates addressing nonpoint
sources of pollution.
fc'S
K
* Periodic EPA/USDA/State meetings serve as the principal tracking
mechanism for NPS Strategy implementation, including agricultural
agency activities/outputs.
- 5 -
-------
New Activities (FY 87}
0 Integrate NFS program with aquifer management program.
0 Cooperate with Headquarters in its evaluation of the effectiveness of
erosion control requirements in the construction grants program.
0 Work with Federal and State Highway/Water Quality officials on construction,
deicing materials and other highway road runoff issues.
0 Organize workshops on urban runoff stormwater problems and control measures,
beginning with EPA staff discussion.
0 Assist in the development of stormwater runoff permits.
- 6 -
-------
NPS Strategy For Region Ill/Chesapeake Ray
FY 1936-1987
PREAMBLE
*
In 1984 EPA created a National Nonpoint Source Task Force which present-
ed to the Administrator a recommended National Nonpoint Source Policy
in December of 1984. The objective of the Policy is to support and
accelerate the development and implementation of Nonpoint Source (NPS)
management programs. The Pol'icy outlines the responsibilities for the
different levels of government and the private sector in managing these
NPS programs. The Policy notes that EPA, as directed by the Clean
Water Act, will serve as the lead agency in coordinating interagency
and State actions for the management of the NPS programs.
One year prior to these actions, an agreement on the restoration of
Chesapeake Bay was signed by the Governors of Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, the Mayor of District of.Columbia and the Administrator of
EPA. This agreement established EPA in a leadership and coordination
role among Federal agencies working with the District of Columbia and
the States in implementing programs to correct NPS problems affecting
the Bay.
Objective:
The ultimate objective of this strategy is to reduce, to an acceptable
level, NPS pollutants entering the water resources of Region III. This
will be accomplished by the implementation of Best Management Practices
{BMPs} on rural, urban and suburban lands within the Region. While all
lands produce some level of pollutant discharge, not all lands need
corrective BMPs at this time. Therefore, only those land areas that
have been identified as high producers of NPS pollutants that impact
waters of the Region are targeted to receive NPS control programs.
Problem;
There have been many studies over the past decade which have singled
out NPS as a major source of pollution in many water bodies. The early
208 studies were the first state-wide efforts to quantify the NPS problems
at the state level. The EPA funded study of Chesapeake Bay indicated
that a large portion of the nutrients entering the Bay came from NPS
and were transported to the Bay in the normal manner, that is with
storm flows. However, it also indicated that large -amounts of the
soluble pollutants move either into the ground water or into shallow
water tables and were discharged into the streams and move into the Bay
as part of the base flow. More recent studies such as the State 305(b)
reports provide the basic information regarding the total water quality
problem in each State. The recently completed ASIWPCA NPS Assessement
Project provides some indication of the extent of the NPS problem facing .
each State. While many of these data cannot be combined directly, they
do provide EPA and the States with a clear understanding of the magnitude
of the NPS problems in the Region. '
-------
Response-States:
All five States and the District of Columbia have programs that address
areas of NFS pollution control and four States have active cost share
programs to help with the agricultural portion of the problem. These
programs are most active in those States that signed the Chesapeake
Bay Agreement in December of 1983. In all cases the MRS programs
operated by the States have identified priority watersheds based on
receiving water quality and/or potential of the watershed to del lever
pollutants and are concentrating their efforts and funds in these
watersheds. Further targeting efforts are being used and tested within
the priority watersheds, with the expectation that NPS programs will
be able to target actual critical acres within a farm or a neighborhood
for implementation of BMPs in the near future.
Response-Regional;
The Region is providing, the leadership for many of the concepts that are
being used in the state programs, and assuming a coordination role with.
all Federal and State agencies-within the Region. The Region has strongly
urged USDA Agencies to utilize their existing programs to address NPS
problems. USDA has been very responsive to this and the 1985 Farm Bill
provides several programs that can help with NPS problems. Many Agencies
such as SCS and CES have provided technical assistance for the development
of farm plans and educational programs to support the plans. These are
but a few examples of the cooperation given to EPA and the States by
not just USDA, but by many Federal Agencies that have programs that can
be of assistance in solving the NPS problems in the Region.
Coordination with Federal Agencies;
Based on its responsibilities and authorities under the Clean Water Act
and the 1983 Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the Region has the lead role for
coordinating Federal activities in the management of NPS water pollution
control efforts. In FY 1986-1987, The Region will increase its coordina-
tion efforts with Federal Agencies to assure maximum use of existing
federal programs to accomplish NPS control objectives within Chesapeake
Bay and Region III.
Region III Action
The Region will continue to provide the
leadership and staff support necessary for
the continued activities of the Federal/
State/Local programs for the restoration
of Chesapeake Bay and all•waters of the
Region.
The Region will continue to work within
existing memoranda of understanding (MOUs)
between EPA and six other Federal agencies
and will try to develop new MOUs with other
key agencies to ensure a fully coordinated
effort to control NPS within the Region.
Target Date
ongoing
ongoing
-------
The Region will continue to work with USDA ongoing
to assure the maximum NPS control results
from implementation of the new Farm Bill
and the existing base farm programs.
The Region will continue to encourage the ongoing
use of inter-governmental personnel assign-
ments, allowing professionals from other
Federal, State and local agencies to he
assigned to EPA offices or vice versa.
•
Problem Assessment:
The Region will work with all jurisdictions to help identify water
quality problems, sources of pollutants and the necessary control
programs to solve the water quality problems. In the Chesapeake
Bay, EPA will continue to operate the Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office
(CBLO) with its computer for all agencies working in the Bay program,
Models and the data to drive them are being maintained and used by
CBLO to better define the NPS problems within the Bay drainage area.
Region III Action
CBLO will update the land use data for the
Chesapeake Bay watershed model and will
begin to run the model to refine the
location of NPS problem areas. Also,
other NPS runoff models will be installed
on the computer for use in the smaller
subwatersheds in the basin.
The Region will encourage the States to
utilize all possible funding sources to
obtain monitoring data for the quantifica-
tion of NPS impacts on the waters of the
Region.
The ground water studies conducted by or
for EPA within the Region are being
structured to investigate NPS inputs into
the ground water system.
The Region will review the priority water
body information and the priority watershed
locations to assure that NPS is being con-
sidered in the proper perspective and that
management programs are in place or are
being proposed where necessary.
The Region will work with the States and
the appropriate Federal agencies to ident-
ify those mining and oil production areas
that are causing water quality problems.
Target Date
2/87
ongoing
ongoing
annually
ongoing
-------
Monitoring andData Evaluation:
Region III Action
The Region is assisting in the evaluation
of selected STORET water quality stations
for use as NPS baseline stations. Current
STORET and pilot NPS stations will be used
along with data from RCWP and certain
research data to calibrate the NPS models
used in the C8LO.
Pilot watershed monitoring will continue
to be a requirement of EPA for implement-
ation funding within the Bay program.
Target Date
10/86
ongoing
The CBLO will continue to integrate all ongoing
other activities of the Region, Headquarters
Office of'Water and R&D into the monitoring,
special studies and evaluation activities
for the Bay and will ensure that the find-
ings are utilized throughout the Region,
not just within the Bay drainage area.
Program Implementation;
The Region will continue to encourage the cooperation of all other
government agencies in addressing NPS management with their ongoing
programs. This can be done by considering NPS and how it can be inte-
grated within existing programs and budgets. The States within the
Chesapeake Bay watershed already have NPS management programs and
are using similar programs in areas outside the Bay. The most fully
developed of these programs are those that deal with agriculture.
Urban control programs are, in some cases, still being developed or
redefined because some states do not have the necessary legislation
to fully address the problem. Since, urban NPS programs do not qualify
for cost sharing like the agricultural programs do, they are regulatory
in nature, requiring more field staff time and a different educational
effort. All of these factors are taken into account as the Region
works to develop a strong technical transfer program centered around
the information and experiences gained from work done in the Bay
program for urban NPS. EPA's Clean Lakes Program and USOA's PL 566
Water Quality Projects are examples of program funding being used
to address specific area NPS water quality problems. In all NPS programs
every effort is being made to ensure that funds are targeted to get the
maximum amount of NPS control for the funds spent over the long term.
-------
Target Date
ongoing
1991
Program Planning, Development, and Implementation:
Region III Action
The Region will continue to encourage the
States to utilize all existing EPA grant
source to address NFS problems at both the
state wide program level and the project
level. Increased use of 106 and 205(j) fund
for NFS studies and Clean Lakes grants for
specific projects are examples of what can
be accomplished within existing authoriza-
tions.
NPS coordinator will continue to serve on
the Technical Subcommittee of the National
Coordinating Committee for the Rural Clean
Water Program (RCWP) and on the State
Coordinating Committees for the three RCWP
projects in the Region.
The CBLO will continue to manage the Imple-
mentation Grant funds for the Chesapeake
Bay and to develop Phase II plans for the
Bay.
The Region will use the information
developed for the Bay in the remainder
of the Region to develop new NPS programs
that are tailored to the specific needs of
an area and that are as aggressive as the
ones for the Bay.
Program integration within the Region FY 37
and cooperation with other agencies will
assure that NPS programs are coordinated
with ground water projects, toxics studies,
and the educational programs of the States
and Universities within the Region.
Program Evaluation and Oversight:
Region III and CBLO are charged with the management of the entire
Chesapeake Bay Program and are constantly evaluating the progress
that is being made on the Bay. Since the majority of the funds are
for NPS implementation'there are several oversight and evaluation
systems in operation. There is a tracking system for installed BMPs,
there are monthly evaluations of grant progress and quarterly reviews
of each implementation grant. The CBLO also tracks the programs and the
progress being made by other agencies in the Bay area as they work on
NPS and related programs. These tracking and evaluation systems are
to be expanded to cover the entire Region as they prove effective
for the Bay program.
ongoing
FY 87
-------
Region III Action
Region III will respond to the specific
NPS items in the Strategic Planning and
Management System and the CB management
goals.
Target Date
FY 86 & 87
The CBLO tracks the implementation progress
of the grants and evaluates that progress,
and recommends changes as needed.
•
Projections are made regarding the overall
effectiveness of the NPS implementation in
the Bay drainage area, using both state and
federal data. Estimates of pollution load
reductions by subwatershed are calculated
for each priority area in the basin.
CBLO staffs the NPS subcommittee for the
Bay to ensure that the necessary technical
transfer is being accomplished among the
action agencies in the Bay. The subcommittee
advises the Implementation Committee on all
items relating to NPS and makes recommenda-
tions for necessary action regarding NPS.
The Region will evaluate and integrate
the experiences of the States and the Bay
program as work progresses .to solve NPS
problems and use these results to refine
and correct the NPS Strategy for the Region.
quarterly
semi annually
ongoing
ongoing
-------
REGION IV FY 1986-1987 NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Region IV FY'86-'87
Nonpoint Source (NPS) Strategy describes the activities which make up the
Region's plan for addressing NPS water pollution. This Strategy is
intended to expand the Region's NPS management efforts by building on
the work already done by EPA and other Federal, state, areawide and local
agencies. The Strategy emphasizes increased coordination and joint
efforts with other Federal agencies. It also encourages the eight Region
TV states to identify priority NPS problems and target their efforts in
priority watersheds and groundwater recharge and high use areas. Finally,
the Regional Strategy will increase the integration of NPS management
into all of its programs. The Region IV NPS FY'86-'87 Strategy is guided
by the Agencywide NPS Strategy and National NPS Policy while focusing on
Regional needs. The following sections identify the five major objectives
of the Strategy and the activities and targeted dates which are needed to
meet these objectives.
I. MORE FULLY UTILIZE EXISTING RESOURCES
Region IV will encourage the increased use of existing resources to address
NFS management needs. Bnphasis will be placed on cooperative efforts
with other Federal agencies including the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
as well as with the states, areawide and local agencies and with a variety
of EPA programs including the Office of Research and Development (ORD).
Activityi
1. Increase coordination with USDA through cooperative
efforts with the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), the
Cooperative Extension Service (CES), the Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS), and the
Forest Service.
o Institute an SCS 'detail to Region IV to work on
agricultural NPS management.
o Participate in the Sand Mountain-Lake Guntersville
water quality project in the State of Alabama.
o Use the SCS \slide-tape show on water quality for
education in Region IV.
o Work with SCS and ASCS to incorporate water quality
goals in the implementation of the "Conservation
Reserve Program" created by the 1985 Farm Bill.
o Review Forest Service's Forest Plans for nonpoint
source/water quality concerns
Target Date;
FY'86
FY'86-'87
FY'87
FT 86-87
Ongoing
-------
;>;?
-A' s
SvS
33
:k*2
ae^
^r*
r--;-l
'^-
Si. "-J*
ia
|;<§
13
*•**
2. Increase coordination with TVA through cooperative
efforts,
o Participate in the Land and Water 201 Project in- Ongoing
eluding serving on various committees. The Regional
Administrator is a member of the Steering Committee.
o Institute an EPA, Region IV detail to work on the EY'86
Land and Water 201 project.
o Develop additional cooperative efforts with TJb. FY'86
in NFS management with emphasis on demonstration.
3. Increase coordination with other Federal Agencies (e.g.
DOI, DOE, DOD) regarding NPS concerns.
o Visit federal facilities {DOE, DOT, etc) to identify FY'87
successful NPS programs to use as demonstrations.
4. work cooperatively with a variety of EPA Regional programs
to integrate NPS concerns.
o Incorporate NPS research needs into Region IV EPA's Ongoing
ORD priority list.
o Include NPS monitoring in the Regional Surface Water FY'87
Monitoring Guidance. Guidance
o Work with Regional and state permit writers to FY'87
incorporate NPS BMP's where appropriate in NPDES
permits.
o Encourage increased use of Section 106, 205(j) and FY'87
314 CWA funds in NPS management. Guidance
II. INCREASE STATE NPS CONTROL EFFORTS
EPA will work with the eight Region IV states to develop or improve state
NPS management programs. The states will be encouraged to use the whole
range of implementation tools to manage their NPS problems (e.g. education,
techincal assistance, cost sharing, regulation, demonstration, etc). EPA
will continue to assist states in this effort.
1. Work with the Region IV states on NPS strategy
• development and implementation.
2. Provide technical support and guidance to the states
and local programs in their efforts to solve surface
and groundwater NPS problems.
3. Encourage the six states in the Land and Water 201
Project area to actively participate in the project.
FY'87
Ongoing
Ongoing
-------
-3-
4. Include in the list of suggested grant eligible FY'87
activities for the Section 106 groundwater grant Guidance
the identification and management of NFS problems.
5. Encourage states to develop incentive programs Ongoing
including cost sharing.
6. Encourage states to support the protection of wetlands Ongoing
through work identified in state program work plans.
7. Encourage states to develop or improve erosion and Ongoing
sedimentation control programs at state and local
levels.
III. FOCUS ON PRIORITY NPS PROJECTS
Special emphasis will be given to environmentally sensitive geographical
areas which are impacted by NFS pollution. States will be encouraged
to identify priorities for NFS management planning and implementation
.activities.
1. States will be encouraged to identify priority surface FY'87
water bodies and groundwater for NFS controls in order
to increase program effectiveness.
2. Special attention will be given to lakes, estuaries Ongoing
and vulnerable water supply aquifers within Region IV
as sensitive areas for NFS controls.
3. Participate in the National Estuary Program project on FY'86-87
Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds in North Carolina to protect
and restore water quality and aquatic resources.
4. Identify areas requiring NFS controls to protect advanced EY'87
treatment (AT) investments.
6. Work through the Land and Water 201 Project to identify Ongoing
priority watersheds in the TVA service area.
IV. IMPROVE REPORTING AND ASSESSMENT
For grant performance accountability and to keep decision makers and the
public better informed and increase awareness of NFS management problems
and progress, better reporting by the States and Region IV is essential.
Also, improved assessment of NPS management needs is necessary for long-
term program planning.
1. Work with states to improve reporting of NPS problems
in Section 305(b) Water Quality Reports.
FY'88 Report
Guidance
-------
-4-
2. Prepare a summary of information in the ASIWPCA and FY'87
305(b) reports on water quality and NPS for Region IV.
3. Work with states and federal agencies to establish Ongoing
baseline monitoring capability.
4. Establish a long-term monitoring strategy for surface FY'87
water and groundwater consistent with Agency monitoring
strategies.
V. INCREASE INFORMATION TRANSFER
The transfer of information on NFS control technology, success stories,
and institutional experiences is essential in maintaining efficient NPS
management programs in all levels of government.
1. Hold a Regional NPS Conference to exchange ideas and FY'87
experiences between all government agencies, organizations,
and others Involved in NPS control.
2. Recognize outstanding NPS projects as "showcase* projects FY'87
to serve as models.
3. Report to Region TV states on incentive programs nation- PY'87
wide. ' .
4. Collect resource material on NPS for use by Region IV Ongoing
staff and states.
5. Provide information on state erosion/sedimentation FY'87
control practices to Region IV states.
-------
REGION V NONPOINT SOURCE FY 1986-1987 STRATEGY
Objective:
Develop a program, complete with work plans, based upon coordination
within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and among other
Federal agencies, States/local entities, and with the public to implement
the National Nonpoint Source (NPS) Policy and Strategy in Region V. Within
Region V, NPS activities are carried out under the framework of three
Environmental Management Reports; these are: NPS Runoff to Water, Protec-
tion of Water Quality in Inland Lakes and Great Lakes' Areas of Concern,
as well as the Great Lakes National Program Office Five Year Strategy and
annual work plans. In particular, Region V will give special attention
to gaps and opportunities in controlling urban runoff, agricultural chemicals
(including toxics), and agricultural land management, especially with
respect to ground water protection and lake restoration/protection. Carry
out prototype projects to focus NPS measures on environmentally sensitive
geographic areas, lake watersheds and critical wetlands.
Activities:
1. Promote and carry out Regional strategy within USEPA, with States/local
entities, and with the public. The strategy will be further refined and
modified to reflect provisions of the Clean Water Act Reauthorization.
2. Work with all the States to develop, refine, or update State NPS
Management Programs/Strategies including implementation steps, .
priorities, responsibilities, funding, and supporting Federal Actions.
0 Incorporate Regional NPS priorities for NPS strategy in guidance and
reviews for State program grants [106, 205{j), 205(g) and for Water
Quality Management (WQM) Activities 303(e) and 305(b)].
0 Evaluate State progress and needs during Mid-Year and End-of-Year
Reviews.
0 Evaluate and assist States to strengthen 305(b)/ASIWPCA NPS
Assessments.
0 Incorporate NPS considerations into State Lake Classification
Systems.
0 Continue tributary monitoring to assess agricultural NPS toxicant
loadings.
0 Continue to provide technical assistance to the States, as needed.
0 Incorporate Phosphorus Plans into State WQM Plans.
0 Incorporate Remedial Action Plans for Great Lakes Area of concern into
the State WQMs.
-------
-2-
3. Arrange Federal agency assistance to meet State needs and carry out NPS
strategy:
0 Continue to participate in, and follow-up on, State-by-State
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Conservation Review Group
Meetings.
0 Evaluate and assist the Region's four Rural Clean Water Projects
(RCWP), Small Watershed Program Land Treatment Projects (PL 566),
and special Agricultural Conservation Program (ACP) Projects as
requested.
- Annual reviews of RCWP - 1986, 1987
- Cosponsor the RCWP Workshop - July 1987
0 Coordinate NPS activities with Clean Lakes, wetlands activities
(Section 404), Great Lakes National Program Office funded special
projects, and ground water programs.
0 Complete NPS components of the Upper Connecting Channel Study
(USEPA, Michigan, Canada).
0 Work with the States and USDA on implementation of the sodbuster,
swampbuster and conservation easement provisions of the 1985 Farm
Bill. • .
0 Work with the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture
to complete their NPS project - 4/86 to 10/87.
0 Work with ACP on cost-sharing priorities for water quality.
0 Work with the States and USDA to implement the Conservation Reserve
Program under the 1985 Farm Bill. Evaluate impacts upon water
quality after each sign-up period and seek necessary changes in
guidance to include consideration of water quality criteria.
0 Involve Cooperative Extension Service (CES) in water quality NPS
education efforts. Enhance the role of CES in NPS control efforts
through the CES liaison effort.
0 Continue to monitor and provide assistance as requested in the Soil .
Conservation Service (SCS) Water Quality Training Program.
4. Co-sponsor an annual policy and technical workshop to meet States'
NPS needs as identified during Mid-Year Reviews and in 305(b)/ASlWPCA
Assessment. (Illinois - 10/1985, Minnesota - 8/1986, Wisconsin -• 9/1987)
5. Continue information exchange and dissemination (technical transfer)
process.
-------
-3-
6. Develop prototype NPS programs as part of Clean Lakes program.
0 Develop prototype urban runoff, and agricultural NPS control project
for a priority lake.
7. Continue implementation of State Phosphorus Plans as required by
Annex III. Revise and/or update State Phosphorus Plans as appropriate.
(Michigan, Ohio, Indiana)
8. Complete or continue agricultural Clean Lakes projects with joint SCS/
ACP funding.
9. Identify and predesignate wetlands that protect priority waters from
NPS runoff or seepage under Section 404(c) or Advance Identification of
Disposal Sites Program.
10. Incorporate NPS controls in Sole Source Aquifer Protection program.
0 Implement Agrichemical/Ground Water Study.
0 Provide assistance to the Central Sands Ground Water Project.
0 Integrate Agrichemical Use Study with the Ground Water Program.
11. Provide technical assistance and management support to two States by
developing a point/nonpoint project in each State.
12. Develop computerized data base for NPS problem areas and implementation
projects. (1987)
13. Revise the appropriate EMRs to reflect the new provisions in the Clean
Water Act.
14. Review and strengthen NPS protection programs on Federal Installations
under Executive Order 12088.
15. Evaluate NPS impacts and proposed preventive measures in the course of
Environmental Reviews under NEPA.
16. Evaluate institutional arrangements and propose necessary changes to
anticipate cumulative impact of development on water quality, including
meeting antidegradation requirements and policy on BMP's Water Quality
Standards. (SAM-32)
17. Incorporate NPS issues and efforts into the In-Place Pollutant Work
Group activities.
18. Incorporate NPS concerns and issues in EPA's review of COE's public
notices on Section 404 discharges into wetlands; EPA will work with SCS
and State Associations of Conservation Districts to emphasize the
importance of wetland preservation and to ensure proper implementation
of Section 404.
-------
-4-
19. Assist Headquarters in the development of a data base which identifies
waters not impacted by point sources and possibly impacted by nonpoint
sources. Stream data base - 1986 Lake and gound-water date bases -
1987.
-------
Region 6 FY 86-87 NPS Strategy
Coordination with Federal Agencies
Activity
0 Coordinate with USDA through cooperative efforts with the Soil
Conservation Service (SCS), the Cooperative Extension Service,
(CES), the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
(ASCS), and the Forest Service.
0 Develop an Intergovernmental Personnel Assignment Agreement
with SCS and acquire an SCS detail to Region 6 to work on
agricultural NPS Management programs.
0 Develop an information network between the Federal Agencies
involved in NPS activities and the State Water Quality
Management (WQM) agencies in Region 6.
0 Work with SCS and ASCS to incorporate water quality goals in
the implementation of the "Conservation Reserve Program
(CRP)" created by the 1985 Farm Bill. Work with the State
WQM agencies to develop NPS monitoring programs on streams
where significant participation in the CRP occurs.
0 Review Forest Services Forest Plans for NPS/water quality
concerns.
0 Evaluate the progress of the Louisiana RCWP project in
Bayou Bonne Idee.
0 Review NPS Programs included in Federal Facilities Pollution
Control Plans required under Section 313 of the Clean Water
Act.
0 Attend and participate in meetings held by other Federal
Agencies and EPA Headquarters and other Regions concerning
NPS activities.
0 Coordinate with other Federal Agencies (e.g. noi, DOE, DOH)
regarding NPS concerns.
0 Visit Federal Facilities to identify successful NPS
programs.
Problem Assessment
Activity
0 Evaluate the 1986 305(b) Reports with regard to NPS data
for all States in Region 6 and work with the States to
update and improve the ASWIPCA NPS Assessment.
Target Date
FY 86-87
FY 86
FY 87
FY 87
Ongoing
FY 87
FY 86-87
Ongoing
Ongoing
FY 87
Target Date
FY 86-87
-------
Problem Assessment (continued)
Activity
0 Encourage the States to continue to Identify and assess the
surface and water quality Impacts of NPS pollutants.
0 Encourage the States to continue to Improve their reporting
and documentation of NPS problems.
0 Continue Regional oversight activities for the Illinois
River, Trinity River and Houston Ship Channel NPS assessment
studies.
0 Continue to evaluate before and.after data from completed
Clean Lakes Studies.
0 Continue to work with grantees on the development of NPS
monitoring programs and evaluate NPS assessment reports
developed by the grantees.
0 Transmit National NPS related data and information to the
State NPS planning agencies for their use and information.
Program Implementation
Target Date
FY Hfi-87
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Activity
0 Continue to encourage Region 6 State, Areawide and local
agencies to develop NPS management programs for waters
being impacted by NPS pollution.
0 Work with USDA's ASCS in Region 6 to evaluate special
projects involving water quality in their Agricultural
Conservation Program (ACP).
0 Request States to evaluate and update their NPS Management
Programs and NPS Designated Management Agencies and amend
their Water Quality Management Plans where appropriate.
';' V
0 Provide guidance and assistance to States and other agencies
for developing and implementing effective NPS Management
Programs.
0 Assure States develop methods to implement their anti-
degradation policies with regard to NPS.
0 Encourage NPS planning agencies to develop incentive
programs to implement NPS controls.
0 Provide technical assistance to NPS planning agencies in
assessing NPS problems and developing controls.
Target Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
FY fifi-R7
Ongoing
FY 86
Ongoing
Ongoing
-2-
-------
Program Implementation (Continued)
Activity
0 Encourage NPS planning agencies and Designated Management
Agencies to track the implementation of NPS controls and
evaluate their effectiveness.
Target Date
Ongoing
Serve as a clearinghouse for NPS information developed by Ongoing
Region 6 NPS planning agencies and make the reports and data
available to other interested agencies within the Region.
0 Develop Regional Strategy to implement NPS provisions in
Revised Clean Water Act.
0 Assess the feasibility of implementing NPS/point source
trade-offs in selected NPDF.S permitting situations.
Resources
Activity
0 Continue to encourage States to use Clean Water Act
resources under Sections 104, 106, 208, 205, and 314
to address NPS problems.
0 Continue to encourage the States to work with other
State and Federal agencies to increase their capability
to address NPS problems.
Program E v a1u at ion and 0yersight
Activity
0 Evaluate States' progress toward meeting the goals of
the CWA with regard to NPS water quality problems.
0 Evaluate the grantees' performance in meeting all NPS
related commitments in approved workplans.
* Transmit results of evaluations to the grantees and
develop corrective action plans to address shortfalls.
FY
FY 87
Target Date
FY 86-87
Ongoing
Target Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
-3-
-------
-------
REGION VII NPS STRATEGY AND WORKPLAN March 1986
Environmental Problem Description;
»
At the present time, this Region believes that there are NPS water quality
problems or a potential for problems in the following types of waterbodies or
areas:
1. firoundwater in shallow aquifers - occurrence of nitrates and pesticides in
many areas of Region.
2. Reservoirs and natural lakes - sediment, pesticides, nutrients leading to
aesthetic problems, accelerated eutrophication, and fish flesh contamination
throughout the Region.
3. High quality coldwater streams - sediment deposition modifying stream beds
and creating aesthetic impairments and fish population reductions (trout streams
in Nebraska Sandhills, as example).
4. Warmwater streams where significant use impacts are observed due to sediment
and pesticides.
The predominant NPS problems in the Region are from agricultural operations.
However, fish flesh contamination due to chlordane in urban runoff is becoming
a significant localized use impact on some urban lakes and rivers. Also, very-
localized water quality impacts occur due to past mining operations in some
parts of the Region.
At the present time, these problems are generally not considered to be
immediate public health dangers, but appear to represent a long range threat to
aquatic life and traditional groundwater uses. Examples of concern are the
contamination of fish due to pesticide use and detections of pesticides and
inorganics in some water supplies. NPS parameters do not lend themselves to
conventional monitoring to assess the extent of problems, nor are criteria
always available to judge the severity of some chemical's impacts, but both the
Region and states need to continue to pursue identification of problems and
target areas for controls based on present knowledge of biological and chemical
water quality conditions.
Background;
Past state program efforts through CWA Section 208 have identified some
geographic areas of concern but they were primarily based on an assessment of
land conditions (i.e., erosion) and not stream conditions or groundwater concerns,
The priorities of the current 205(j) and 106 funded programs are to identify
water quality problems due to NPS and prioritize watersheds for controls.
-------
-2-
EPA has a relatively small Section 3W Clean Lakes program to provide direct
implementation funding for BMPs. In addition, we encourage the use of existing
Department of Agriculture program funding, state cost-share funding, and land-
owner funding to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) in priority
watersheds. A key component of any control program funding is the targeting
concept whereby any funding is aimed at specific watersheds with specific
problems. Other "options" are available in current national and state costshare
programs to increase the effectiveness of these programs for specific watershed
controls and these options should be fully utilized in the future. Some examples
of coordinated watershed project implementation already exist in the Region
(i.e., RCWP and Clean Lakes projects) and can be used as models. Iowa, for
example, has developed an extensively coordinated proposal to address NPS ground-
water problems in the Big Spring area of northeast Iowa which combines monitoring,
implementation and evaluation activity.
Regional Work Activity:
A Regional goal is for each state to identify two to three watersheds need-
ing BMP implementation assistance and begin implementation in those watersheds
each year. This identification effort would come after the state has analyzed
the stream segments having water quality impacts and prioritized the various
point and nonpoint source problems.. . A parallel effort to refine problem or
impact assessment for continued identification of priority watersheds should
continue each year along with specific planning' for watershed controls. These
concepts for developing a state NPS management program are shown in Attachment A.
Individual state programs will be negotiated during SEA and 205(j) workplan
development. The Regional role in this effort will be in four main areas:
1. General Coordination - communication and information transfer among all
agencies.
a. Routine NPS meetings to share information with state and Federal agri-
cultural agencies.
b. Information transfer of "good" approaches and concepts of other states.
c. Policy and direction communication to state environmental agencies.
2. Problem Assessment Assistance - professional staff assistance for problem
identification.
a. Review and transfer of Headquarters initiatives to develop additional
pesticide criteria for aquatic life and human health protection.
b. Devote staff resources to current state-of-art water quality assessment
techniques.
c. Analysis of STORET and other water quality data with objective of docu-
menting the impact and trends of NPS pollution.
-------
-3-
3. Program Implementation
a. Maintain coordination with Federal agricultural agencies with implemen-
tation programs.
b. Focus future awards of EPA Clean Lakes funds on projects involving water-
shed BMPs.
c. Contact interest groups, such as LICA, to develop innovative implementa-
tion solutions.
4. Evaluation and Oversight - review of current program effectiveness through
quarterly visits and mid-year reviews.
a. Assess technical program adequacy.
b. Evaluate implementation progress in specific watersheds.
Activities in these areas will be primarily conducted through the Planning
and Analysis Section Chief and state planning coordinators with management -
attention handled by Water Compliance Branch Chief and Water Management Division
Director, as necessary. Office of Research and Development and Environmental
Services Division, as well as Office of Groundwater staff may also be called
upon for specific technical assistance. A NPS coordinator to focus overall
Regional efforts will either remain assigned to a planning coordinator or
reassigned to a full time position. Technical assistance in the form of under-
standing NPS impacts on stream uses and the day-to-day coordination of the many
agencies Tnvolved are two potential needs of current Regional and state programs.
Attention to these needs during the fiscal year is required if the Region and
the states are to increase their abilities in controlling NPS pollution. A
-specific effort to identify-opportunities in any authorized CWA program will
also be required if such authorization occurs.
-------
.4-
REGIONAL NPS WORKPLAN ACTIVITIES FOR FY-86
Date Activity (Agency involved) '
10-21 "Plant Nutrient Use and the Environment" symposium sponsored by The
23 Fertilizer Institute, Kansas City, Missouri
11-1 Outline of state FY-86 305(b) report due - should include NPS element
(state environmental agencies)
11-15 Review of ASIWPCA NPS Assessments national and regional summary (EPA)
Participate in development and review of annual RCWP reports (Iowa, Kansas,
Nebraska) (all)
12-1 Identification of waters not fully supporting designated uses due to NPS
(state environmental agencies)
12-31 List of high priority watersheds requiring implementation (state environ-
mental agencies depending on SEA negotiations)
1-17 Clean Lakes project candidates requiring watershed 8MPs due to Regional
Office. State agencies responsible for Clean Lakes may want to conduct
Phase.I studies with own funds in order to enhance priorities
2-15 Discuss current ACP program status with USDA and state agencies (EPA)
3-15 Ofstribution of current Regional NPS strategy to all agencies (EPA).
3-15 Examine need for fish tissue pesticide monitoring depending on fall sampling
results (EPA and state environmental agencies)
3-28 Prepare for HO mid-year;review of NPS programs and progress (EPA)
4-1 FY-86 305(b) reports due with identification of NPS problems (state
environmental agencies)
5-1 Start FY-87 negotiations on state work programs to include specific NPS
. outputs on a watershed basis (EPA and state environmental agencies)
5-15 to Site visits to all RCWP, Clean Lakels, and other watershed implementation
7-15 areas (EPA)
9-15 Report on implementation progress and status of NPS management program
through State EPA Agreement (state environmental agencies depending on
SEA negotiations)
9-30 Commitments for FY-87 NPS work in place for all states via state environ-
mental agency workplans
-------
-5-
MOOEL STATE NPS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
I. DESIGNATE PRIORITY WATER BODIES
A. Each, year identify those wates within State boundaries that are not
supporting designated uses and those currently meeting designated uses
but which are likely to be impacted in the future.
8. Select those waters where future action is needed to manage nonpoint
sources of pollution (rank water bodies and watersheds).
C. Target implementation efforts on priority water bodies, including
both surface waters and ground water.
D. Potential criteria for selecting priority or targeted watersheds.
1. Nonpoint sources contribute significantly to the impairment of a
designated use or prevent the receiving water from meeting a water
quality standard, or nonpoint sources will in the future prevent a
designated use or achievement of a water quality standard.
2. Nonpoint sources are largely controllable, i.e., not background.
3. NPS BMPs are available and feasible.
II. IDENTIFY MAJOR TYPES OF NONPOINT SOURCES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
A. Designate the general categories or subcategories of nonpoint sources
of pollutants or, where appropriate, specific nonpoint sources that
contribute significant pollutant loadings to the water identified above.
B. Identify best management practices (BMPs) that would reduce pollution
resulting from each category, subcategory, or particular nonpoint source
designated above.
III. WATERSHED PLANNING
A. States should lead development of watershed-based NPS implementation
programs for selected priority water bodies. For selected individual
watershed projects, a single design plan should be developed which
includes the following elements:
1. Water quality goals established by variable, e.g., reduce BOD by
20%, re-establish the native trout fishery;
2. A watershed inventory to characterize categories of pollutant
sources, individual sources of NPS loadings (including if possible
magnitude of sources), and impact of each source on the receiving
water body;
-------
-6-
3. Estimated load reductions needed to achieve water quality goal(s);
4. Alternative BMPs available to reduce pollution resulting from each
category, subcategory, or particular nonpoint source identified
in the watershed;
5. Ranking of individual nonpoint sources or areas within the watershed
t as to their priority for installation of BMPs;
6. Total BMP needs and estimated costs for the watershed project;
7. A monitoring and evaluation program to evaluate progress against
watershed project goals and objectives; and
8. Roles and responsibilities of agencies involved in the watershed
project.
IV. DEFINE AGENCY ROLES AND AUTHORITIES IN OVERRALL PROGRAM PLAN
A. The environmental agency may not actually conduct all of the detailed
watershed planning but will be considered responsible for defining the
overall program and coordinating implementation and management activity
to insure water quality improvement or maintenance.
B. A written summary of roles and responsibilities of all involved agencies
at all phases of the NPS program should be developed and included in the
CPP, as well as individual watershed plans.
V; EVALUATE RESULTS -
A. Assess progress against program objectives and include water quality
monitoring results and review of BMP implementation and maintenance
in program reviews and in State Section 305(b) reports.
B. Use results of evaluations to improve targeting efforts and other
program components.
-------
JUL 11 19S6
EPA REGION VIII
FY 1986-87 NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY
BACKGROUND
This Nonpoint Source (NPS) Strategy for EPA Region VIII has been developed -
based on the National EPA Nonpoint Strategy as adapted to Region VIII needs.
It follows the format of the national strategy. Inter-regional (EPA) and
intra-regional activities have been added, with special emphasis on supporting
coordination between other Federal agencies and their respective State water
quality agencies.
The scope of the future Region VIII NPS program will be a direct function
of congressional activity presently under way. This Regional NPS Strategy is
based on existing resource availability to implement those elements of the EPA
National Strategy which are of highest Regional priority in managing for
environmental results. Individual State components of this strategy will
appear, as negotiated, in each State's FY'86 and FY'87 State/EPA Agreement.
These negotiations are in progress with three to be completed by July 1, and
the other three by October 1, of each year. Those elements of the EPA National
Strategy most applicable to Region VII! state programs were extracted, adapted
to the Region, and provided to the States in the form of State/EPA Agreement
Guidance.
In Region VIII, the program is first 'focusing on agriculture, since it is
the most serious problem and the one for which Best Management Practices
(BMPs) are most available. Silviculture problems are occurring for which BMPs
are known, but implementation procedures for watersheds with multiple ownership
are not yet developed. There has been significant Regional involvement in
working with the Forest Service to develop silviculture BMPs and monitoring
programs. Mining BMPs are not yet well developed and Colorado and Montana
indicate mining as their major NPS problem. A mine drainage BMP pilot project
is being considered for Peru Creek in Colorado. Construction NPS is ready for
control, but urban runoff cost-effectiveness is still under study nationally.
The national stormwater permitting program is still under study.
Federal lands compliance with nonpoint source control is a priority
activity in Region VIII. The major sources of pollution from Federal lands are
logging roads, overgrazing, mining, and oil and gas exploration. The lands
involved are primarily those of the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land
Management (BLM). The scope of the size of the Federal lands issue is
illustrated by the fact that of the total area in the Region VIII (372.2 million
acres (MA)), about 322 (120.5 MA) is Federal lands. The total area of the
Region is larger than that of EPA Regions I, II, III, and V combined, (361 MA)
and the Federal lands share alone is almost as large as the total area of EPA
Regions I, II, and III combined (153 MA). Region VIII deals with 3 Regional
Forest Service Offices, 28 National Forests, 6 BLM State Offices and 17 BLM
Districts. Assuring NPS compliance through Forest Plans and BLM Resource
Management Plans is therefore a major activity.
-------
The overall Region VIII NPS strategy Is to support each State to the
maximum extent utilizing existing resources to implement State and national
goals and the National NPS Policy. State and EPA outputs and milestones to
achieve these strategies are outlined in each State/EPA Agreement document.
The major focus will be on lands managed by the Forest Service and Bureau of
Land Management, and on agricultural programs provided by the Soil Conservation
Service, the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service and the
Extension Service. The Regional strategy is to work for closer cooperation
between each State and their respective Federal land management agencies to
resolve issues and to support each Federal agency in implementing their own
strategy. Urban Construction Strategies are being deferred awaiting completion
of the National Urban Runoff Project reports. Major leadership for
urban/construction sources is presently being provided by several areawides
through 205(j) funding and Clean Lakes projects. A phosphorous control program
for urban runoff into Cherry Creek Reservoir is being implemented by the
Cherry Creek Basin Authority.
Regional NPS Strategies have been prepared for the major NPS source
categories of agriculture, grazing, and silviculture. Development of a
urban and mining source strategies will have to await availability of resources
and cost effective BMPs.
-2-
-------
COORDINATION WITH FEDERAL AGENCIES
Based on its responsibilities and authorities under the Clean Water Act,
EPA has the lead Federal agency role for facilitating and coordinating
Federal consistency in the management of NPS water pollution. In FY
1986-1987, Region VIII will emphasize increased interaction with Federal
agencies to assure maximum use of existing Federal programs to accomplish
NPS management objectives. Following are some of the specific activities
Region VIII will undertake in FY 1986-1987 and beyond to coordinate NPS
management activities with other Federal agencies (additional activities
with other Federal agencies are cited throughout the Strategy).
EPA Action Target Date
0 Region VIII will continue to provide the leadership FY86-FY87
and staff support necessary to continue to participate
in the activities of the National Nonpoint Source Task
Force (including its workgroups) to provide input from
Regions VIII. IX, X.
* Region VIII will support efforts as needed to strengthen FY86-FY87
and/or develop new memoranda of understanding (MOUs)
between its States and other Federal agencies related
to NPS responsibilities. Special emphasis will be
placed on enhancing cooperative efforts for planning,
project overview, and providing water quality input for
activities on Federal lands through State participation
on interdisiplinary teams; project reviews; selection
of riparian restoration projects; review, approval and
certification of BMP's; involvement in area analyses; etc.
* Region VIII will work with other Federal agencies FY86-FY87
to achieve better interagency coordination and
cooperation. The main focus will be on the Forest
Service, BLM, and Fish and Wildlife Service.
* Region VIII will coordinate with other Federal FY86-FY87
agencies relative to actions affecting priority
waters.
" Region VIII will meet anually (as resources allow) Annual
with Forest Service Regions I, II and IV and the
respective State water quality staff to select
watersheds, activities, and projects of priority
concern. The Region will assist in developing area
analysis/cummulative impact analysis procedures within
the F.S. planning process that will help answer
concerns raised by EPA in the review of Forest Plans.
* Region VIII will continue to be the lead EPA Ongoing
Region for the Colorado River Salinity Control Forum.
-3-
-------
Region VIII will support both Forest Service
riparian zone management demonstration project
intiatives and BLM Riparian Area Management by
Objective (RAMBO) demonstration projects by providing
water quality and fishery inputs.
Region VIII will provide technical transfer on EPA's
ecoregion mapping and reference stream initiatives
to other agencies where applicable.
Region VIII will continue to provide NPS project
inputs to Clean Lakes projects within the Region
and act as the lead Region on the Big Stone Lake
project in cooperation with Region V.
Region VIII will incorporate NPS management concerns
in review of other agencies' actions under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section
309 of the Clean Air Act.
Region VIII will incorporate NPS concerns in EPA's
review of the COE's public notices on Section 404
discharges into wetlands; Region VIII will work
with other agencies to emphasize the importance of
wetland preservation.
EPA Regions VIII, IX, X developed procedures and
a checklist for review of Forest Service Forest Plans
and EISs.
EPA Regions VIII, IX, and X held a workshop with
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) representatives to
develop better procedures and a check list for review
of BLM Resource Management Plans.
Region VIII will participate with Region IX, X and
the Forest Service to further develop procedures
and surrogate indicators of the status of fisheries
by utilizing stream habitat measurements.
EPA Regions VIII, IX, and X will hold (pending funds
availability) a workshop with BL M and U.S. FS
respresentatives on environmental indicators and
cummualtive impacts.
FY87
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Sept.'85-
Feb.'86
Feb. 6-7,
1986
April 2-4, '86
June 3-4, '86
June 18-19, '86
July 21-23, '86
FY'87
-4-
-------
PROBLEM ASSESSMENT
Federal, State, local, areawide, and interstate agencies have the lead role in
NPS problem assessment in areas within their jurisdiction. Region VIII will
work in conjunction with these agencies to help identify water quality problems,
pollution sources, and management needs for State, private and Federal lands.
This will build upon the work done under Section 208 and 303 of the Clean
Water Act, the Rural Clean Water Program, State Section 305(b) water quality
reports, the ASIWPCA NPS Assessment, and in other programs. Region VIII will
encourage all agencies to include monitoring/assessments of NPS pollution
problems in both surface and ground water as part of their annual work plans.
Region VIII involvement will include technical support and assistance in problem
identification, monitoring and data management, and integration of
Federal land management agency NPS assessments into state NPS assessments.
Problem Identification
EPA Action
8 Region VIII will analyze the NPS information
collected as part of the ASIWPCA NPS Assessment
and support EPA HQ in comparing the data to other
data sets and determining the most useful
information items,.with special emphasis on
inclusion of Federal lands. Regional staff will
work with the States to update .the.ASWIPCA survey
as needed.
0 Region VIII will evaluate the NPS
information submitted as a part of the 1986 State
Section 305(b) reports {due in 4-86).
* As part of the guidance for the 1988 State Section
305{b) reports. Region VIII will provide
guidance to States on how to report NPS problems to
assure comparability of data.
* Region VIII will continue to work to improve the
groundwater portion of 305(b) reports for its States,
especially for pesticides from nonpoint sources.
0 Region VIII will continue to use the Environmental
Management Reports (EMR) process as a management
tool to identify areas where nonpoint sources are a
.problem.
* Region VIII will cooperate with the Forest Service and
EPA Regions IX and X to develop instream habitat
criteria and monitoring systems which may be used
in NPS problem identification.
Target Date
June '86
July '86
FY 87
FY '87
Annua1
FY86-FY87
-5-
-------
Monitoring and Data Management
EPA Action
Target Date
* Region VIII will continue to develop and document Ongoing
NPS data bases, and develop mechanisms to retrieve
and utilize data related to nonpoint sources from
other agencies and to,support the States in
preparation of 305(b) reports.
0 Region VIII will continue to coordinate with the use Ongoing
attainability study staff and the Regional Monitoring
and Data Support Group to provide NPS input to their
activities.
0 Region VIII NPS staff will continue to participate in Ongoing
the Regional Groundwater Advisory Committee to oversee
NPS activities, especially as they relate to assessments
of pesticides in groundwater from NPS. Regional staff
will continue to support the Agricultural Chemicals in
Groundwater Study initiatives.
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Region VIII will continue to encourage all government agencies to
integrate NPS management concerns into their existing programs and to
develop new implementation programs as needed. In FY 1986-1987, a major
thrust will be to work with Federal agencies to better utilize existing
implementation programs to address NPS control needs (additional activities
are also included in the section of the Strategy on Federal Agency
Coordination). Special emphasis will be placed on providing support to the
Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and the Federal Highway
Administration. Region VIII expects States, in cooperation with appropriate
levels of government and the private sector, to take the lead in developing
NPS management programs for priority waters (ground and surface waters).
Region VIII will provide guidance and assistance to States and other agencies
for developing and implementing effective NPS management programs, with special
attention to the problems created by multiple ownership watersheds where
private, State, and Federal lands are intermixed. Assistance will be provided
for: setting priorities for remedial and preventive management efforts for
specific priority waters; NPS program development/management; targeting NPS
management efforts; and development of BMP's to be consistently used
regardless of land ownership.
Priority for available EPA funds will go to States which have
identified NPS pollution as a problem and are working actively to develop
and implement management programs through their ongoing water quality
management program. In addition, Region VIII will continue to provide
assistance for national projects such as the rural Clean Water Programs
in South Dakota and Utah and for USDA programs such as the Agricultural
Conservation Program throughout the Region.
-6-
-------
Program Planning, Development, and Implementation
EPA Action Target Date
o
Region VIII will support the continued involvement Ongoing
of water quality agencies in NPS management efforts
through available funding for Clean Water Act
Section 104, 106, 205, and 314 grants.
Region VIII will coordinate its activities with those Ongoing
of other Fedral and State agencies to implement NPS
programs in State identified priority waters within
limitations of existing and future resources. For
example, Region VIII will meet (as resources allow)
with Forest Service Regional Offices I, II, and IV
and Bureau of Land Management State and District
Offices in conjunction with the respective State
water quality staff to review yearly activities and
select areas/watersheds of major concern for close
cooperation between agencies.
Region VIII will work with EPA Headquarters and Ongoing
USDA State Offices to incorporate NPS concerns
into the 1987 Conservation Reserve Program
(CRP) and will participate on CRP Committees
where requested.
Region VIII will continue to provide annual review Ongoing
of the RCWP projects in South Dakota and Utah
to participate on the State Coordinating Committees
and Local Coordinating Committees for RCWP
projects.
Region VIII will provide staff support for the FY86-87
Water Quality Standards/BMP Workgroup established
as part of the NPS Task Force to address the
relationship between standards and BMPs, and on
the NPS Assessment Workgroup.
Region VIII will continue to review Forest Service Ongoing
Forest Plans and Bureau, of Land Management
Resources Management Plans to incorporate NPS
related concerns and provide follow-up support
as necessary.
Region VIII will support Forest Service Regions FY86-FY87
I, II & IV in developing silviculture BMP's by
assisting in the development of the Soils and
Water Conservation Practices Handbook and-the
related monitoring approaches.
.7.
-------
r
Targeting EPA Action Target Date
Region VIII will respond to Federal, State, local, Ongoing
and areawide agency requests for assistance in
targeting their NPS management programs in
priority waters.
" Region VIII will continue to work with the U.S. Ongoing
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service's
(ASCS's) Agricultrual Conservation Program (ACP) to
implement special projects involving water quality
e.g., by supporting ACP Amendments 111 and 115
activities.
0 Water Quality Management Plans for nonpoint sources As Needed
will be updated when necessary for program effectiveness
as determined by program needs or during State/EPA
Agreement workplan negotiations,
Technical Assistance/Education
EPA Action Target Gate
* Region VIII will provide technical assistance to Ongoing
Federal, State, interstate, local agencies and others
on all aspects of managing NPS pollution including
problem assessment and program development, management,
and evaluation, as resources allow.
-8-
-------
INCENTIVES AND ENFORCEMENT
Currently, both voluntary and regulatory programs are being used to
manage NPS impacts. EPA believes that voluntary NPS management programs
are valuable and that incentives are sometimes necessary to increase the
scope of implementation and improve the equity of such programs.
Voluntary programs, however, need to include effective program evaluation
components. Where nonpoint source-related water quality goals are not
being met after an adequate period of voluntary program implementation,
regulatory programs may be necessary, and States and localities should
consider developing and implementing such programs. Where regulatory
programs are used, adequate enforcement mechanisms should be developed to
ensure compliance with program requirements.
While a variety of incentive and enforcement tools may be used to
achieve compliance or implementation of NPS BMPs, it is important to
note that EPA currently has few legal authorities under the Clean Water
Act to require implementation of NPS BMPs. Section 313 of the Clean
Water Act and Executive Order 12088 address Federal facilities (including
lands) compliance with State, interstate or local water pollution
control requirements including the control of NPS pollution. Also,
stormwater runoff that is "channelized" by means of "discrete conveyances"
located in urbanized areas or at industrial or commercial facilities
falls under the purview of the NPDES point source permit program and
requires permits (see 49 FR 37997, September 26, 1984). EPA is currently
considering revisions to these regulations (see 50 FR 9362, March 7,
1985, and 50 FR 32548, August 12, 1985). The deadlines for stormwater
permit applications where EPA is the permit issuing authority have
been extended to 1987 and 1989 (see 50 FR 35200, August 29, 1985).
Many States and local governments have adopted regulatory programs
including enforcement options for some types of nonpoint sources. NPS
pollution from construction erosion, mining activities, and pesticide
use are the most common types of nonpoint sources for which States/locals
have adopted regulatory programs. Nationally, about one-fourth of the
States have regulatory programs for forestry activities; these programs
vary widely among States. Agricultural NPS problems are currently primarily
addressed with voluntary programs; in some instances, back-up regulatory
provisions have either been adopted or considered. Only a few States and/or
local governments have adopted stormwater management regulatory programs,
directed at \stormwater runoff from new developments.
Incentives
EPA Action
EPA will continue to make existing Clean Water Act
resources under Sections 104, 106, 205, and 314
available to States and localities for NPS management
activites in priority waters, with emphasis on achieving
water quality goals or standards and antidegradation/
serious injury requirements cost-effectively;
Region VIII will use the Agency Operating Guidance to
encourage priority to be given to the use of such funds
for NPS projects.
-9-
Target Date
Ongoing
-------
Region VIII will encourage States to develop incentive Ongoing
programs to share the cost of implementing BMPs i.e.,
cost sharing, loan programs, tax incentives, etc.
Region VIII will work with USDA to integrate water FY86-FY87
quality concerns into the implementation of the Farm
Bill's Conservation Reserve, Sodbuster, and Swampbuster
provisions and will assess the impacts of other farm
programs on NFS pollution.
Enforcement
EPA Action
' Region VIII will explore and define additional general FY86--FY87
permit programs which might be legally adaptable and
implementable under the current Clean Water Act for
managing water quality.
RESOURCES
Region VIII Water Division will assume the lead role within the
Region for coordinating implementation of the Region VIII NPS Strategy.
Region VIII will use existing funding under the Clean Water Act to assist
State and local governments in program implementation. In addition,
Region VIII will encourage other Federal -agencies to utilize their existing
resources and programs to accomplish NPS management objectives.
EPA Action Target Date
* Region VIII will utilize available professional • Ongoing
staff to manage and carry out EPA's responsibilities
identified in this Strategy.
* Region VIII will increase priority of NPS management Ongoing
within limitations of existing and.future available
funds in Sections 104, 106, 205, and 314.
0 Region VIII will work with other Federal agencies Ongoing
to better integrate NPS management concerns into
'.'>. v existing programs.
-10-
-------
PROGRAM EVALUATION AND OVERSIGHT
While all agencies are individually responsible for the periodic
evaluation of their programs, EPA will include such evaluations in
its assessment of NPS management efforts in determining if National
water quality goals are being adequately addressed.
To meet goals and objectives of the Clean Water Act, .Region VIII will
oversee implementation of State water quality programs through its
accountability system and through formal program review of activities as
documented in State/EPA agreements. Region VIII in cooperation with States,
will consider activities of Federal land management agencies as they impact
NPS management.
EPA Action Target Date
* Region VIII will report on NPS pollution as part Annually
of the Agency's Strategic Planning and Management
. System (SPMS) and the Office of Water Accountability
System (OHAS) and include such items in the guidance
for preparation of State/EPA agreements, provided
such guidance is received by March 1 of each year.
" As part of Region VIII's CWA oversight role, Water: Annually
Division/State Programs Branch will assess and
evaluate State NPS programs for consistency
with SPMS and WAS guidance at mid- and end-of-year '
reviews and as part of other management reviews as
they occur.
0 Region VIII will review State lists of priority Ongoing
waters to ensure water impacted by nonpoint sources
are included on such lists.
* Region VIII will evaluate use by States and localities Ongoing
of Section 104, 106, 205, and 314 funds for NPS
management to ensure consistency with National guidance.
0 Region VIII will evaluate and integrate the Ongoing
experiences of its State, areawide, and local NPS
programs, and use the results to refine and modify
the Strategy and direction.
-11-
-------
-------
EPA REGION 9's 1986-87 NONPOINT SOURCE (NFS) STRATEGY WORKPLAN
PREAMBLE
A Federal/State/local Nonpoint Source (NFS) Task Froce was
created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
March 1984 in recognition that many diverse agencies have
a role in NPS management. The Task Force was charged with
developing recommendations to the EPA Administrator on a National
NPS policy and implementation strategies to assure broader
implementation of needed NPS controls. The Task Force presented
a recommended National Nonpoint Source Policy to EPA's
Administrator in December 1984. In addition, EPA Regions are
responsible for developing individual strategy workplans for
implementing the National NPS policy.
The objective of the National NPS Policy is to support and
accelerate the development and implementation of NPS management
programs. Region 9's NPS Strategy Workplan fully supports
this objective. Managing nonpoint sources of water pollution
is a high priority for the Agency and Region 9. NPS pollution
is clearly indentified as a priority issue in EPA's Agency
Operating Guidance. We are committed to work with other Federal,
State, local and interstate agencies and the private sector to
incorporate NPS control measures into their programs, where
appropriate.
In 1986-87, Region 9's NPS effort will be concentrated in
the following areas:
1. General Coordination; Communication and information
transfer among all agencies.
a. Information transfer of approaches and concepts.
b. Policy and direction communication to state
environmental agencies and others as appropriate.
2. Problem Assessment Assistance; Professional staff
assistance for problem indentification and assessment.
a. Provide assistance in the following areas to states:
* NPS problem indentification and assessment
* NPS "post-BMP" measurements
" NPS "target" areas that will encourage success
measurement.
b. Devote staff resources to current state-of-art
water quality assessment techniques.
-------
c. Analysis of water quality data with the objective
of documenting the impact and trends of NFS pollu-
tion.
3. Program Implementation:
a. Maintain coordination with federal agencies having
implementation programs.
b. Contact interest groups to develop innovative
implementation solutions.
4. Evaluation and Oversight; Review of current program
effectiveness through on-site site and mid-year reviews
a. Assess technical program adequacy.
b. Evaluate implementation progress in specific basins.
Activities in the above area will be primarily conducted
by the Water Quality Management and Monitoring Section through
the Water Management Division's geographic branches. The
Office of Ground Water may also be called upon for specific
technical assistance. NFS program management and oversight.
will be handled by the Section Chief who is also the NFS Coord-
dinator.
- 2 -
-------
REGION 9's FY1986-87 NONPOINT (NFS) STRATEGY WORKPLAN
ACTION
Tarqet Completion
Date Date
'Assign one person to work full-time in
the area of NFS pollution during FY-
1986-87. This person will be assigned
to the California (CA) Branch. NFS
responsibilities in Arizona, Hawaii,
Nevada, American Samoa, Guam, the
Trust Territory, and the Commonwealth
of the Northern Marinas Island will
will be handled by the Water Manage-
ment Division's Water Quality Manage-
ment (WQM) Project Officers. Program
oversight, interagency and EPA Head-
quarters (HQ) liaison is the respon-
sibility of the NPS Coordinator.
"NFS responsibilities in CA are as
follows:
- Oversee the' development of CA NPS
strategy.
Conduct NPS assessments
- Region 7 - Draft
Final
- Region 3 - Draft
Final
- Region 5 - Draft
Final
- Indentify NPS projects needing other
federal agency support to proceed
- Draft list
-Review Forest Service EISs.
10/01/86 10/01/86
Ongoing
09/30/86
09/30/86
09/30/86
09/30/86
09/30/86
FY-87
09/30/86
09/30/86
- 3 -
-------
ACTION
Target
Date
Completion
Date
- Sequoia 09/30/86
- Stanislaus 09/30/86
»
- Lake Tahoe 09/30/86
- Shasta-Trinity 09/30/86
- Sierra 09/30/86
- Los Padres 09/30/86
- Klaraath 09/30/86
- El Dorrado 09/30/86
- Six Rivers 09/30/86
°Via contacts with Federal, State and
local agencies, update and implement
the NFS Strategy Workplan in all
States (i.e., Arizona, California,
Hawaii Nevada and the Pacific Terri-
tories through such vehicles as
informal and formal meetings, work-
shops and memoranda of understanding Ongoing
(MOU's). Initiate and/or renew con-
tacts with the following:
- USDA
- SCS
- PS
- ASCS
- USDI
- BLM 04/30
- BOR 05/30
01/30
02/28
03/28
01/28
02/05
09/30
02/05
-------
ACTION
Target Completion
Date Date
"Analyze Section 305(b) and STEP
Reports and WQM plan updates for NFS
problem indentification and status
of State program development.
- Provide comment to States through
the geographic branches.
- Transmit final edition 305(b)
reports to HQ.
- Complete WQ - 21 and transmit it
to HQ.
"Conduct through the geographic
branches mid-year reviews with
states, concentrating on state
NPS programs status and NPS water
quality standards problems and
issues.
°Conduct NPS pollution training
course for Regional 9 staff.
•"Continue to negotiate NPS SPMS
comments and other appropriate
output into FY86-87 Section 106
and 205(j) grants. Develop and
transmit Regional guidance to
States through georaphic branches
03/25
03/25
06/25
05/01
03/25
03/25
06/25
05/01
08/30
07/17
04/18
04/18
'Continue to provide review and
comments on various drafts of
the NPS legislation, the Agency's
NPS Policy, Strategy and other
guidance such a SAM-32.
Ongoing
-5-
-------
ACTION
Target
Date
Completion
Date
"Summarize status of State NFS
program development and imple-
mentation by State and NFS acti-
vity
03/20/87
'Complete and submit the Region's
midyear self-evaluation report of
of all water programs including
NFS.
04/18
04/18
-6-
-------
REGION 10 NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY
6/30/86
I. Profa1 em
States and local agencies have primary responsibility for the control
of nonpoint sources of pollution. EPA's role is to provide technical and
financial assistance and oversight to ensure that Clean Water Act goals are
met. Region 10's strategy for controlling nonpoint sources emphasizes
technical assistance to states, local governments and federal agencies to
carry out effective programs,
Nonpoint source pollution accounts for an estimated 60 percent of the
region's water quality problems. NFS pollution in the region is most often
associated with agricultural and silvicultural activities. Urban runoff,
septic tank, failures, construction, and mining are more localized but may
cause serious contamination problems.
II. Objectives
1. To more effectively address NPS problems from agriculture and
silviculture, because they are priority categories, and EPA's and
state's resources are limited;
2. Assist state, local, and federal agencies 1n the implementation of
effective nonpoint source control programs; and
3. Document the basis for and publicize successful NPS water quality
projects that have resulted in significant reductions 1n loadings
to streams and lakes.
III. Action Plan for Nonpoint Sources Program
A. COORDINATION HITH FEDERAL AGENCIES
Activity
1. Hork with USDA agencies to implement
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)
a. Prepare brief summary of program
for EPA managers
b. Letters to ASCS to confirm EPA's
Interest and participation
c. Participate in State Conservation
Review Group meetings in Imple-
menting CRP
2. Assist states in negotiating federal
agency commitments to comply with HQM
programs, such as use of special and
ongoing USDA and USDI funds to better
support WQM programs and commitments
Lead
Responsibility
Moore
Burd/Moore
Moore/Martin
Burd
Completion
Date
6/30/86
6/30/86
FY 86-87
FY 86-87
-------
Activity
3, Participate In annual meetings with
USOA agencies to review WQM activities
and areas of mutual need and follow-up
4. Meet with BLM State Office Planning
Staff on E1S reviews as follow-up to
Denver and Seattle meetings on resource
management plans and water quality;
develop plan of EPA and state actions
needed to strengthen Interagency
coordination
Lead
Responsibility
Burd .
Martin
Completion
Date
9/30/86
FY 86-87
B. PROBLEM ASSESSMENT
Activity
1. Develop contract, proposal, and tech-
nical support document'on "threshold of
water quality and beneficial use Impacts
from forest practices".
a. Final contract prepared and awarded
b'. Complete contract work.
c. Field test draft report
d. Publish final document
2. Review and prepare comments to states
on the NPS Information submitted as
a part of 1986 305 grants as part of FY 86 SEA:
a. Alaska
1. Point McKenzle Dairy Waste
2. Delta-Clearwater Creek WQM
3. Placer Mining monitoring
Plan Rob1son/Moore
Plan Rob1son/Moore
Robison/Moore
12/01/86
12/30/86
12/30/86
-------
Activity
Lead
Responsibility
Completion
Date
b. Idaho
1. Update of Statewide Forest Martin
Practices Plan
2. Impacts of on-stte waste on Martin
Lake Pend Orel lie
3. Strategy and regulations for Scarburgh
mining operations
4. Field method for assessing Martin
Injury to water uses
5. Guidelines for dairy and feed- Scarburgh
lot waste management
c. Oregon
I. Yaquina Bay WQM Moore
2. Tlllamook Bay water quality ESD
monitoring
d. Washington
1. Implementation reviews of area- Moore
wide WQM agencies
2. WQM Plan Stl1laquamish Basin Moore
3. Update state's urban runoff Moore
strategy
4. Hood Canal WQM Plan Moore
2. -Provide the following technical
assistance to states and federal
agencies in implementing NPS
programs:
a. Alaska
1. Coordinate with ADEC the review EE8
of 1986-1990 Alaska Pulp
Cooperation Long Term Sale Area
Final EIS
2. Assist ADEC in developing Moore
control strategies for forestry
activities in SE Alaska
b. Idaho
1. Participate 1n Technical Ad- Martin
visory committee to update
Forest Practices WQM Plan
2. Assist IDHW and USFS 1n devel- Scarburgh
oping and Implementing NPS
controls for mining in central
Idaho
3. Assist Rock Creek Rural Clean Martin
Water Program (RCWP) Local and
State Committees In preparing
draft and final annual reports
10/01/86
12/30/86
9/30/86
12/30/86
6/20/86
12/30/86
FY 86-87
FY 86-87
12/30/86
12/30/86
12/30/86
9/30/86
9/30/86
1/01/87
FY 86-87
FY 86-87
-------
Lead Completion
Activity Responsibility Date
4. Review EPA's draft general WD/IOO 12/30/86
permit for concentrated animal
feeding operations In Idaho
c. Oregon
1. Review WQM parts of forest EEB FY 86-87
plans for seven of the thirteen
national forests in Oregon
(Environmental Evaluation Branch-
EEB) will be lead reviewers for
all plans
Schedule for Draft EIS as of 2/12/86
* Oeschutes, Bend 1/86
Freemont, Lakevjew 7/86
* Malheur, John Day 9/86
* Mt. Hood, Gresham 8/86
Ochoco, Prineville 6/86
* Rogue River, Medford • 8/86
Siskiyou, Grants Pass 7/86
* Siuslaw, Corvallls 6/86
Umatllla, Pendleton 7/86
* Umpqua, Roseburg 9/86
Wai Iowa-Whitman, Baker 2/86
* Willamette, Eugene 9/86
Winema, Klamath falls 9/86
* Office of Water Planning Review
2. Assist ODEQ in updating , FY 86-87
statewide WQM Plan for Forest
Practices
d. Washington
1. Review WQM parts of forest plans EEB FY 86-87
for four of the six national
forests In Washington (EEB will
be lead reviewer for all plans)
Schedule for Draft EIS as of 2/12/86
* Colville, Colvllle 9/86
* Gifford Plnchot, Vancouver 9/86
* Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie, Seattle 9/86
Okanogan, Okanogan . 3/86
* Olympic, Olympia 6/86
Wenatchee, Wenatchee 4/86
* Moore will review WQM parts of plans
2. Liaison with Puget Sound Water Moore FY 86-87
Authority's NPS staff and
Technical Advisory Committee;
provide technical assistance
and Interagency coordination
-------
Activity
Lead
Responsibility
Completion
Date
Conduct Implementation reviews
of Rural Clean Water Programs
(RCWP) and Silvlcultural WQM
Programs of states and federal
agencies and prepare reports
and recommendations
Schedule
Tlllamook Bay RCWP 8/30/86
Rock Creek RCWP 8/30/86
Silvlcultural Programs 9/30/86
In each state
Conduct quarterly reviews and Moore
oversight of Moses Lakes Ag-
ricultural Cost Share Program
Moore/Martin
FY 86-87
FY 86-87
-------
-------
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
ACP - Agricultural Conservation Program
APHIS - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
ARS - Agricultural Research Service
ASCS - Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
ASIWPCA - Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control
Administrators
BLM - Bureau of Land Management
BMP - best management practice
BOR - Bureau of Reclamation
CES - Cooperative Extension Service
COE - Corps of Engineers
CRP - Conservation Reserve Program
CSRS - Cooperative State Research Service
CWA - Clean Water Act
DOD - Department of Defense
DOE - Department of Energy
DOI - Department of Interior
EIS - Environmental Impact Statement
EMR - Environmental Management Report
FIFRA - Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
FS - Forest Service
IPM - integrated pest management
LICA - Land Improvement Contractors of America
MOUs - memoranda of understanding
N - nitrogen
-------
NASDA - National Association of State Departments of Agriculture
NCSU - North Carolina State University
NPS - nonpoint source
NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act
NPDES - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
OEA - Office of External Affairs
OPP - Office of Pesticide Programs
OPPE - Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation
OPTS - Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances
ORD - Office of Research and Development
OW - Office of Water
OWAS - Office of Water Accountability System
P - phosphorus
POTW's - publicly owned treatment works
RCA - Resource Conservation Act
RCWP - Rural Clean Water Program
SCS - Soil Conservation Service
SEA - State/EPA Agreement
SPMS - Strategic Planning and Management System
TSCA - Toxic Substances Control Act
TVA - Tennessee Valley Authority
f
USDA - U.S. Department of Agriculture
WQM - water quality management
WQS - water quality standards
-2-
------- |