Pionpoinf
Source Workshop
February 25-26, 1997
Hotel Santa Fe
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Final Agenda
Sponsored by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6
Tuesday, February 25
Moderator: Diane Evans, Tribal Water Quality
Standards Coordinator, USEPA Region 6
8:00 - 9:00 Registration
9:00 - 9:30 Overview - EPA Priorities
Brad Lamb
Nonpoint Source Regional Coordinator,
USEPA Region 6
9:30 -10:00 Presentation
Debra Madison
Environmental Programs Manager,
Office of Environmental Protection,
Fort Peck Tribes
10:00-10:15 Break
10:15 -10:30 Presentation
William B. Hathaway
Director, Wate/ Quality Protection
Division,'USEPA Region 6
10:30 -11:00 NMED NPS Casef tiidies
11:00 -12:00 NPS issues/Tribal Presentations*
12:00 -1:30 Lunch {
-------
Contents
Front Matter
List of Attendees
Santa Fe Facts, Tips, & Information
Restaurant Guide
Notes
Tribal Nonpoint Source Planning
Tribal Nonpoint Source Planning Handbook
Program Authorization Information
Example Tribal Assessment Report
Example Tribal Management Plan
Funding Sources
Potential Tribal Funding Sources
Summary of EPA's Indian Program Funding
Outreach Information
Getting in Step
Nonpoint Pointers
Contacts
USEPA Regional Indian Program Coordinators
AIEO Responsibility by Function/Issue Area
-------
Tribal Nonpoint Source Workshop
Attendees List
Santa Fe, NM
February 25 - 26, 1997
Sam Anderson
Pueblo of Laguna
P. O. Box 194
Laguna, NM 87026
Phone: 505/552-7546
fax: 505/552-7534
Naomi L. Archuleta
Tesuque Pueblo Env. Dept.
RT. Box 360-T
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/983-2667
Fax: 505/982-2331
Anthony R. Armijo
Pueblo of Nambe
Rt. 1
P. 0. Box 117BB
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/455-2036
Fax: 505/455-2038
Steffanie Barnett
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-6684
Connie Beery
Pueblo Offic of Env. Prot.
P. O. Box 3256
Albuquerque, NM 87109
Phone: 505/881-2254
Fax: 505/883-7641
Toney Begay
Pueblo Offic of Env. Prot.
P. O. Box 3256
Albuquerque, NM 87109
Phone: 505/881-2254
Fax: 505/883-7641
Kirk Bemis
Pueblo of Zuni
Conservation Project
P. O. Box 339
Zuni, NM 87327
Phone: 505/782-5852
Fax: 505/782-2726
Sandra Bitsie
BIA-AAD-ROADS
P. 0. Box 26567
Albuquerque, NM 87125
Phone: 505/766-3146 .
Fax: 505/766-3176
Mark Blakeslee
Bureau of Land Management
New Mexico State Office
P. O. Box 27115
Santa Fe, NM 87505
Phone: 505/438-7424
Fax: 505/438-7426
Dorothy Brown
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-8141
Todd Caplan
Santa Ana Pueblo
51 Jemez Dam Rd.
Suite 107
Bernalillo, NM 87004
Phone: 505/867-0615
Fax: 505/867-6120
Lawrence Cata
San Juan Pueblo
P. O. Box 1099
San Juan Pueblo, NM 87566
Phone: 505/852-4212
Fax: 505/852-4820
John Chapman
Pojoaque Pueblo
Rt. 11, P. O. Box 208
Sante Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/455-3383
Fax: 505/455-3633
Barbara Cywinska-Bernacik
Pueblo of Laguna
P. O. Box 194
Laguna, NM 87026
Phone: 505/552-7534
Fax: 505/552-7534
Dino Chavarria
Santa Clara Office of
Environmental Affairs
P. 0. Box 580
One Kee Street
Espanola, NM 87532
Phone: 505/753-7326
Fax: 505/753-8988
Roger Dean
U.S. EPA - Region 8
999 18th Street
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303/312-6947
Fax: 303/312-6071
Joseph Chavez
Pueblo of Sandia
P. 0. Box 6008
Bernalillo, NM 87004
Phone: 505/867-4533
Fax: 505/867-9235
Allen Duran
Tesuque Pueblo Env. Dept.
RT. Box 360-T
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/983-2667
Fax: 505/982-2331
-------
James Enote
Pueblo of Zuni
Conservation Project
P. 0. Box 339
Zuni, NM 87327
Phone: 505/782-5852
Fax: 505/782-2726
Diane Evans
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/655-6677
Amy Gambrill
U.S. EPA Headquarters
Office of Water
401 M Street, SW (4503F)
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202/260-7105
Fax: 202/260-1977
Bernadine Garcia
Pueblo of Acoma
P. O. Box 309
Acoma, NM 87034
Phone: 505/552-6604
David Gordon
Cochiti Environmental Dept.
Pueblo de Cochiti
P. 0. Box 70
Cochiti, NM 87072
Phone: 505/465-0617
Fax: 505/465-1997
Ben Harrison
U.S. EPA - Region 6
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-7101
Bill Hathaway
U.S. EPA - Region 6
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-7101
Louie Hena
Pueblo of Tesuque
Route 5, Box 360T
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/983-2667
Fax: 505/982-2331
Heather Himmelberger
EPA - Region 6
801 University Building, SE
Albuquerque, NM 87106
Phone: 505/272-7357
Fax: 505/272-7355
Beth Janello
Pueblo of Sandia
P. 0. Box 6008
Bernalillo, NM 87004
Phone: 505/867-4533
Fax: 505/867-9235
Brad Lamb
U.S. EPA - Region 6
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone: 214/665-6683
Fidel Lorenzo
Pueblo of Acoma
P. O. Box 309
Acoma, NM 87034
Phone: 505/552-6604
Pamela Lucero
Santa Clara Office of
Environmental Affairs
P. 0. Box 580
One Kee Street
Espanola, NM 87532
Phone: 505/753-7326
Fax: 505/753-8988
James Mermefo
Picuris Pueblo
P. O. Box 127
Penasco, NM 87553
Phone: 505/587-2519
Fax: 505/587-1071
Charles Lujan
San Juan Pueblo
P.O. Box 1099
San Juan Pueblo, NM 87566
Phone: 505/852-4212
Fax: 505/852-4820
Hershal Muniz
Jicarilla Apache Tribe
P. Q. Box 507
Dulce, NM 87528
Phone: 505/759-3242 x 404
Fax: 505/759-9122
Deb Madison
Fort Peck Tribe
Office of Environmental Prot.
605 Indian Ave
Poplar, MT 5255
Phone: 405/768-5155x399
Fax: 406/768-5478
Dennis Olson
BIA - Albuquerque Area
615 1st Street
Albuquerque, NM 87107
Phone: 505/766-3167
Fax: 505/766-3174
Charles Oritiz
Pueblo of Acoma
P. 0. Box 309
Acoma, NM 87034
Phone: 505/552-6604
Thora Padilla
Mescalero Apache Tribe
P. 0. Box 227
Mescalero, NM 88340
Phone: 505/671-4494
Fax: 505/671-9191
Jacob Pecos
Cochiti Environmental Dept.
Pueblo de Cochiti
P. O. Box 70
Cochiti, NM 87072
Phone: 505/465-0617
Fax: 505/465-1997
-------
Michael Quintana
Cochiti Environmental Dept.
Pueblo de Cochiti
P. 0. Box 70
Cochiti, NM 87072
Phone: 505/465-0617
Fax: 505/465-1997
Steve Romero
Nambe Pueblo
Rt. 1
P. O. Box 117BB
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/455-2036
Fax: 505/455-2038
Erica Reith
BIA - Mescalero Agency
P. 0. Box 189
Mescalero, NM
Phone: 505/671-4410
Fax: 505/671-4899
Michael L. Romero
Pueblo of San Felipe
P. 0. Box 4219
San Felipe Pueblo, NM 87001
Phone: 505/867-8645
Fax: 505/867-8646
Austin Rock
Santa Clara Office of
Environmental Affairs
P. 0. Box 580
One Kee Street
Espanola, NM 87532
Phone: 505/753-7326
Fax: 505/753-8988
Blane M. Sanchez
Pueblo of Isleta
P. 0. Box 1270
Isleta, NM 87022
Phone: 505/869-2710
Fax: 505/869-4236
Jose A. Sanchez
Pueblo Of Sandia
P. O. Box 6008
Bernalillo, NM 87004
Phone: 505/867-4533
Fax: 505/867-9235
Kurt Sandoval
Jicarilla Apache
P. O. Box 507
Dulce, NM 87528
Phone: 505/759-3242
Fax: 505/759-9122
Marvin Sarracino
Pueblo of Laguna
P. 0. Box 194
Laguna, NM 87026
Phone: 505/552-6011
Fax: 505/552-6941
Allen Sedik
Bureau of Indian Affairs
P. O. Box 26567
Albuquerque, NM 87125
Phone: 505/766-1039
Fax: 505/766-3472
Augustine Seymour
Pueblo of Acoma
P. O. Box 309
Acoma, NM 87034
Phone: 505/552-6604
Blanca Surgeon
RCAP
1939 Warner Cr.
Santa Fe, NM 87505
Phone: 505/471-4297
Fax: 505/471-4299
Dale Swanson
BIA/NPA
P. O. Box 4269
Fallview Station
Espanola, NM 87533
Phone: 505/753-1448
Fax: 505/753-1404
Leroy Tecube
Jicarilla Apache Tribe
P. 0. Box 507
Dulce, NM 87528
Phone: 505/759-3242
Fax: 505/759-9122
Elmer C. Torres
Pueblo de San lldefonso
Rt. 5
P. 0. Box 31 5A
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/455-2273
Fax: 505/455-7351
Jimmie Torivio
Pueblo of Acoma
P. O. Box 309
Acoma, NM 87034
Phone: 505/552-6604
Gavy Valdo
Cochiti Environmental Dept.
Pueblo de Cochiti
P. O. Box 70
Cochiti, NM 87072
Phone: 505/465-0617
Fax: 505/465-1997
Michael Vigil
Tesuque Pueblo Env. Dept.
RT. Box 360-T
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Phone: 505/983-2667
Fax: 505/982-2331
Thora Walsh-Padilla
Mescalero Apache Tribe
P. O. Box 227
Mescalero, NM 88340
Phone: 505/671-4494
Fax: 505/671-9191
Laura Watchpine
Pueblo of Acoma
P. 0. Box 309
Acoma, NM 87034
Phone: 505/552-6604
Curtis Williams
Mescalero Apache Tribe
P. O. Box 227
Mescalero, NM 88340
Phone: 505/671-4494
Fax: 505/671-9191
-------
Elizabeth Winter Bill B. Wyatt Luiz Zamora
Picuris Pueblo Pueblo de San lldefonso Taos Pueblo
P.O. Box 127 RouteB P. 0. Box 1846
Penasco, NM 57553 P. 0. Box 315 - A Taos, NM 87571
Phone: 509/587-2519 Santa Fe, NM 87501 Phone: 505/751-4601
Fax: 505/587-1071 Phone: 505/455-2273 Fax: 505/758-4604
Fax: 505/455-7351
-------
Santa Fe Facts, Tips & Intonation
Santa Fe is the capital of New
Mexico.
New Mexico is a state in the United
States of America, having joined the US.
in 1912.
You do not need a visa or passport to
visit Santa Fe unless you're from a
true foreign country.
Santa Fe means "Holy Faith" in
' Spanish. It is often called "the Gty
Different."
Santa Fe is located in the foothills of the
Sangre de Cristo Mountains, 7,000 feet
above sea level, with nearby peaks as
high as 12,000 feet.
Santa Fe has plenty of sun-
shine, an average of 300 days
each year. But it can snow as
early as October and as late as May.
Santa Fe averages 14 inches of rainfall a
yearand 30 to 34 inches of snow.
You can ski from Thanksgiving to
Easter.
Santa Fe is a community where 60,000
people live and work.
Santa Fe is the second oldest town in
the U.S., founded in 1607 by the Spanish,
13 years before the Pilgrims landed at
Plymouth Rock.
1* Indians lived here long before
Santa Fe was even a town, more
than 1,000 years ago.
Santa Fe has 4,500 hotel and motel
rooms, as well as charming bed and
breakfast inns.
.... . Santa Fe has 200 restaurants, 150
I I art galleries, 50 Indian jewelry
I I shops, 8 major museums, and a
I I world-famous opera.
Santa Fe is one of the largest art
markets in the world.
You will love visiting Santa Fe.
Take it easy. Santa Fe's high altitude
(7,000 feet above sea level) means air is
rarefied, thinner. It usually takes about
48 hours to adjust.
Use sunscreen and wear a hat. There
are no beaches, but Santa Fe is closer
to the sun, and the sun shines 300 days
of the year.
Watch your alcohol intake.
One drink is the equivalent of
three at sea level
If s dry, sometimes less than 20 percent
humidity. Nights and early mornings are
coolish even in July and August.
Santa Fe is in mountain
and ski country, so expect
six to eight major snow-
falls from November to April.
Reservations are always recommended
for upscale restaurants. Busiest dining
hours are from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. Casual
dress is acceptable in most restaurants.
Standard tipping is 15 to 20 percent
of the bill. Some restaurants will add a
service charge up to 18 percent for par-
ties of five or more.
If you're staying out-
side the downtown area,
your best bet is to have a
car. There is city-wide taxi service and a
public bus system, Santa Fe Trails, that
serves the city with six routes. Buses
operate from 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, and from 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays. There is
no service on Sundays or holidays.
Schedules are available on each bus, at
libraries and at locations throughout the
city. For schedule and fare information,
call 984-6730.
ซ Parking can be tight in
Santa Fe in June, July and
August, though most tour-
ist attractions are within walking
distance of downtown hotels. There
are 15 city-owned parking lots in the
downtown area.
Be patient in traffic and mindful of
pedestrians.
Make hotel reservations in
advance. Weekends in the
summer are usually booked
near capacity, and rooms during Santa
Fe's Indian Market (third weekend in
August) are booked up to a year in
advance.
Seniors: Check with your doctor
regarding any physical condition that
.could be affected by Santa Fe's high alti-
tude. Wear sturdy walking shoes and be
aware of uneven floors when entering
historic buildings. If you have dietary
concerns, call the restaurant ahead of
time for information.
WHERE TO FIND IT
VISITOR INFORMATION
Note: All New Mexico telephone num-
bers are in the 505 calling area.
Santa Fe Convention
and Visitors Bureau
Sweeney Center
201W. Many St.
Santa Fe, NM 87501-0909
(505) 984-6760
(800)777-2489
New Mexico State
Department of Tourism
Santa Fe Welcome Center
Lamy Building
491 Old Santa Fe Trail
Santa Fe,NM 87501
HOW'S THE
WEATHER
Mnnlli
monm
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
High/Law
Fahrenheit
40/19
44/22
51/28
60/35
69/43
79/52
91/57
91/56
74/49
63/38
50/27
41/20
High/low
Celsius
4/-7
7/4
11 /-2
16/2
21/6
26/11
32/14
32/13
23/9
17/3
10/-3
S/-7
Weather and Road Conditions:
(800) 432^269
-------
VI A
//
Dfta,
la***
MOM"'
Downtown Santa'Ke
**** Majitr 'I'horaunhfarrs
Ol/irr Streets
M Major Public Parks
Public Parking
O Public Knlrounu
ฎ Visitor Information
<4A Smilflf> Trails City Bus Terminal
/
/>
o,
m x .
U <
**ปซ>!,
Ani
^
rttiions Advertising, Inc
Map of Santa Fe
(Including the Downtown Area and City Attractions)
To Santa Fe
Race Track
Where to Go, What lo See
Downtown Area (see map at left)
Around the Plaza
The Plaza
City Hall
Federal Courthouse
Institute of American Indian Arts Museum
Museum of Fine Arts
Palace of the Governors
St. Francis Cathedral
Santa Fe Public Library
Sena Plaza
Sweeney Convention Center
Old Santa Fe Trail Area
DQ Loretto Chapel
fฃ San Miguel Mission
Q Slate Capitol Building
Canyon Road Area
Canyon Road Entrance
Gypsy Alley
First Ward School
El Zaguan
Chrislo Rey Church
Guadalupe Street Area
tB Old Railroad Depot
^9 Santuario de Guadakj
ffl Sanbusco Mark
To Tacts and
Santa fe Opera t
To
Las Campanas
Camino la Tierro
Budunan Rd '
X
See Downtown
Enlargement at Left
.^
IsanMaleoRd
St. Michaels Or
Siringo Rd
Rodeo & ^
Fairgrounds -f
Rodeo Bd <
Elsewhere in Santa Fe
(see map above)
NORTH
To Santa Fe
Ski Basin
?J
.}tlim
dfM^I
&\
VaU
*X The Turquoise Trail L.iynwP.>isjnuK
_1 Mile
i^H
lishiiyt Company
ghU Rnervtil
ry Ininrnwtiim IlluUnlcd. |w5
College ol Santa Fe
Museum of Indian Arts and Culture
Museum of International Folk Art
Wheelwright Museum of the American Indian
St. John's College
Santa Fe Children's Museum
To Los Vegas, NM
and Eldorado.
-------
Restaurant Guide
(Telephone numbers are in the 505 area code unless otherwise noted.)
A A/I E R I C A N
BISHOP'S LODGE RESORT
Bishop's Lodge Road 983-6377 CD 2
BOBCAT BITE
Route 3, Old Las Vegas Highway 983-5319
CHELSEA STREET PUB & GRILL
Villa Linda Mail 473-5105 CD I
THE DOUBLE A
331Sandoval 982-8999
CD2
FOX'S UPSTAIRS BAR & GRILL
740 St. Michael's Drive 473-3697 IZ1 2
GRANT CORNER INN
122 Grant Avenue 983-6678
CD
HARRY'S ROADHOUSE
Route 9, Old Las Vegas Hwy. 989-4629 CD
ST. FRANCIS RESTAURANT & PUB
(Hotel St Francis)
100 West Water Street 983-5700 CD I
SAN FRANCISCO STREET BAR A GRILL
114 West San Francisco Street 982-2044 CD 2
TOMMY'S BAR & GRILL
208Galisteo 989-4407 CD I
TOUSHIE'S LOUNGE & RESTAURANT
4220 Airport Road 473-4159 CD I
ZIA DINER
326 South Guadalupe 988-7008 CD 2
BARBEQUE
BOBBY RUBINO'S
4048 CerriUos Road 473-9387 CD 1
COWGIRL HALL OF FAME
RESTAURANT
319 South Guadalupe 982-2565 CD!
CAFETERIA
FURR'S CAFETERIA
522 Cordova Road 982-3816 CD
FURR'S CAFETERIA
DeVargas Center 988-4431 CD
LUBY'S CAFETERIA
Villa Linda Mall 473-7084 CD
CHINESE
CHOW'S
720 St Michael's Drive 471-7120 CD?
CHOPSTIX
238 North Guadalupe 820-2126 CD
FORTUNE COOKIE
4250 CerriUos Road 438-2012
HUNAN RESTAURANT
2440 CerriUos Road 471-6688 CDS
IMPERIAL WOK ORIENTAL GOURMET
731 Canvon Road 988-7100 CD I
| | CREDIT CARDS
2 FULL LIQUOR
5 BBER ซ. WINE
H DOWNTOWN AREA
H CANYON ROAD
^| WITHIN CITY LIMITS
^H OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS
ON LOK YUEN
3242 CerriUos Road 4734133
CD
PACIFIC CHINESE RESTAURANT
112 West San Francisco #310 988-9588 CD 2
THE PEKING PALACE
1710 CerriUos Road 984-1212 CD 2
SAIGON CAFE
501 West Cordova 988-4951 CD
SZECHWAN CHINESE CUISINE
1965 CerriUos Road 983-1558 CD 2
YIN YANG CHINESE RESTAURANT
418 CerriUos Road 986-9279 CD 2
COFFEE HOUSES
AZTEC STREET CAFE
317 Aztec 983-9464
BACKROOM COFFEEBAR
616 Canyon Road 988-5323 CD
CAFE DEL REY
919 West Alameda 984-2671 CD
CLOUD CUFF BAKERY
1805 Second Street 983-6254 CD 5
DOWNTOWN SUBSCRIPTION
376 Garcia Street 983-3085
EL CANON
308 West San Francisco (Hilton) 986-6417 CD 2
GAUSTEO NEWS & TICKET CENTER
201 Galisteo Street 984-1316
JAVA JOE'S
2801 Rodeo Road
474-5282 CD
OLD SANTA FE TRAIL
BOOKS & COFFEEHOUSE
613 Old Santa Fe Trail 988-8878 CD 2
PLAZA BAKERY/HAAGEN-DAZ
56 East San Francisco 988-3858
ZIA BAKERY
328 South Guadalupe 988-5155 CD
C O M TIIM E M T A L
ATALAYA RESTAURANT
320 South Guadalupe 982-2709 CD 2
BISTRO 315
315 Old Santa Fe Trail 986-9190 CD 2
CAFE CASSIS
103 East Water Street 989-1717 CD 2
CAFE ESCALERA
130 Lincoln Avenue 989-8188 CD 2
LA CASA SENA RESTAURANT
125 East Palace Avenue 988-9232 CD 2
THE COMPOUND
653 Canyon Road 982-4353 CD 2
THE EVERGREEN
Hyde Park Road 984-8190 CD 2
PAUL'S RESTAURANT OF SANTA FE
72 West Marcy Street 982-8738 CD 2
PETROGLYPH RESTAURANT
(Radisson Picacho Hotel)
750 North St Francis Drive 982-5591 CD 2
THE PINK ADOBE
406 Old Santa Fe Trail 983-7712 CD 2
PINON GRILL
(Hilton Hotel)
lOOSandoval 986-6400 CD 2
POULET PATATE
ROTISSERIE PROVENCALS
106 North Guadalupe 820-2929 CD 2
RANCHO ENCANTADO
State Road 592, Tesuque 982-3537 CD 2
SANTACAFE
231 Washington Street 984-1788 CD 2
STAAB HOUSE RESTAURANT & BAR
(La Posada de Santa Fe Hotel)
330EastPalace 9864000 CD 2
DELI
BACA STREET DEU
930Baca 982-3500 CD
BAGELMANIA
420Catron 982-8900 CD
CACTUS ZACK'S CAFE
8380 CerrUlos Road 473-0444
CARLOS' GOSP'L CAFE
125 Lincoln Avenue #117 983-1841
MUCHO - GOURMET
SANDWICH SHOPPE
135 West Palace Avenue, Suite 200 988-2223
MUCHO - GOURMET
SANDWICH SHOPPE
1711-G Llano Road 473-7703
NEW YORK BAGEL SHOP AND DEU
720 St Michael's Drive 474-5200 CD
PICCOLO CAFE
142 Lincoln Avenue 984-1709
THE NOON WHISTLE
451 West Alameda 988-2636
TWO FORKS CAFE
227 Don Caspar 988-1403
-------
FAMILY
CARROW'S RESTAURANT
1718 St. Michael's Drive 471-7856 CD 2
DENNY'S RESTAURANT
3004 CerriUos Road 471-2152 D
JB'S BAKERY & RESTAURANT
1007 St. Francis Drive 984-0110 CD
JB'S BAKERY & RESTAURANT
2000 CerriUos Road 473-1244 CD
KETTLE RESTAURANT
4250 CerriUos Road 473-5840 CD
SANTA FE SAM'S RESTAURANT
3668 CerriUos Road 471-1009 CD
SOURER SALAD
2428 CerriUos Road 473-1211
VILLAGE INN PANCAKE HOUSE
3155 CerriUos Road 471-2000 CD
FAST FOOD
ARBY'S ROAST BEEF
3267 Cerrillos Road 471-6211
BAJA TACOS
2621 CerriUos Road
471-8762
BERT'S BURGER BOWL
235 North Guadalupe 982-0215
BLAKE'S LOTA BURGER
3200 Cerrillos Road 471-2433
BLAKE'S LOTA BURGER
404 North Guadalupe 9834915
BLAKE'S LOTA BURGER
2004 St. Michael's Drive 471-8694
BLAKE'S LOTA BURGER
420 Airport Road 473-7633
BUMPIE
2860 Cerrillos Road 473-7500
BURGER KING
3136 Cerrillos Road 471-2800
BURGER KING
St. Michael's & Llano 983-1000
BURGER KING
100 North St. Francis Drive
988-1222
CHICAGO DOG EXPRESS
Paseo de Peralta & CerriUos Road 984-2798
CORN DOG 7
Villa Linda MaU 471-3433
DAIRY QUEEN BRAZIER
De Vargas Center 988-5443
DAIRY QUEEN BRAZIER
911 West Alameda 982-8480
DAIRY QUEEN BRAZIER
Villa Linda Mall 471-8532
HARDEE'S RESTAURANT
1640 St. Michael's Drive 471-7794
KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN
3295 Cerrillos Road 471-7042
KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN
lOUSouth St. Francis Drive 983-5489
LA BELL'S
31)1 Jefferson 986-8223
LONG JOHN SILVER
SEAFOOD SHOPPE
3257 Cerrillos Road 471-0059
MA & PA'S BURGERS
Villa Linda Mall 473-9429
MCDONALD'S
739 Cerrillos Road 984-1490
MCDONALD'S
3299 CerriUos Road 471-041 1
MCDONALD'S
1621 Pacheco 988-9500
ORANGE JULIUS
Villa Linda MaU 471-0416
ROSA'S
907 West Alameda 982-7672
ROSA'S
1945 Cerrillos Road
820-7672
REAL BURGER
227 Don Caspar 988-3717
SCHLOTZSKY'S SANDWICH SHOP
763 CerriUos Road 983-5647
SCHLOTZSKY'S SANDWICH SHOP
3410 CerriUos Road 474-3711
SONIC DRIVE IN
2861 CerriUos Road 471-1750
SONIC DRIVE IN
4042 CerriUos Road 471-0600
SONIC DRIVE IN
1721 St. Michael's Drive 984-2522
TACO BELL
3029 CerriUos Road
TACO BELL
1057 Cerrillos Road
471-0611
982-5065
WENDY'S OLD FASHIONED
HAMBURGERS
2801 CerriUos Road 471-8832
FRENCH
ENCORE PROVENCE
548AguaFria 983-7470 CD 2
FRENCH PASTRY SHOP
La Fonda Hotel 983-6697 2
LE CAFE ON THE TRAIL
311 Old Santa FeTraU 982-7302 CD 2
GREEK
PLAZA CAFE
54 Lincoln Avenue 982-1664 CD 2
INDIAN
INDIA HOUSE
2301 Cerrillos Road 471-2651 CD 2
INDIA PALACE
227 Don Caspar 986-5859 CD 2
ITALIAN
ANDIAMOI
322Cartield 995-9595 CD 2
BABBO GANZO TRATTORIA
130 Lincoln Avenue 986-3835 CD f
CAFE ROMANA
31 Burro AUey 984-8804 2
HOWARD'S HIDEAWAY
142 Lincoln 984-8658 CD 2
JULIAN'S
221 Shelby 988-2355 CD I
LA TRA VI ATA
95 West Marcy Street 984-1091 CD 2
PAST ABILITY
418 CerriUos Road 988-2856 CD 2
PORTARE VIA ITALIAN CAFE
SOOMontezuma 988-3886 CD
PRANZO ITALIAN GRILL
540Montezuma 984-2645 CD I
SERGIO'S
1620 St. Michael's Drive 471-7107 CD 2
THE PALACE RESTAURANT
142 West Palace Avenue 982-9891 CD I
TONY'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT
2601 CerriUos Road 471-8272 CD 2
JAPANESE
MASA SUSHI
927 West Alameda
982-3334 CD 2
SAKURA
321 West San Francisco Street 983-535305
SHOHKO-CAFE
321 Johnson Street 983-7288 CD 2
TERIYAKI BOWL
1847 CerriUos Road 9884500
MEXICAN
OLD MEXICO GRILL
2434 CerriUos Road 473-0338 CD I
MIDDLE EASTERN
CAFE OASIS
526Galisteo 983-9599 CD 2
WHISTLING MOON CAFE
402 North Guadalupe Street 983-3093 2
NATIVE AMERICAN
CORN DANCE CAFE
409 West Water Street 986-1662 CD 2
N E W MEXICAN
AGREPINAS
1201 CerriUos Road 986-1682 CD J.
ANDREA'S
(Lamplighter Motel)
2405 CerriUos Road 438-6007 CD I
BIMI'S
(Inn at Loretto)
211 Old Santa Fe Trail 988-5531 CD I
BLUE CORN CAFE
133 Water Street 984-1800 CD I
BURRTTO COMPANY
111 Washington Avenue 982-4453
-------
CASA MARGARITA _
373()CerrillosRoad 473-2217 ! _l t
CORDEUA'S
1601 Berry Avenue 988-1303 CD
DAVE'S NOT HERE
lUSHickox 983-7060 7
DIEGO'S CAFE & BAR
De Vargas Center 983-5101 Of
EL ACAPULCO SALOON & GRILL
1196 Harrison Road 438-7777 i
EL CO/VIAL
3571 Cerrillos Road 471-3224 O I
EL COMAL
997 Rodeo Road, at Richards Ave. 438-0146 CD
GABRIEL'S
US 285 - 2 miles north of Camel Rock
455-7000 OI
130 Lincoln Avenue 983-9797 Of
GREEN ONION
1851 St. Michael's Drive 983-5198 Ol
313 Guadalupe Street 982-9762 OS?
HORSEMAN'S HAVEN CAFE
6500 Cerrillos Road 471-5420
225 East Marcy Street 983-5311
LA CHOZA
905 Aland Street 982-0909 O 5
(La Fonda Hotel)
100 East San Francisco Street 982-5511 OS
LA TAOSENA EN SANTA FE
3297 Cerrillos Road 471-5700 O
416AguaFria 988-2769 Ol
THE LIQUID COMPANY BAR & GRILL
1901 St. Michael's Drive 984-1219 O I
UTTLE ANITA'S MEXICAN FOOD
2811 Cerrillos Road 473-4505 O2
MARIA'S NEW MEXICAN KITCHEN
555 West Cordova Road 983-7929 OI
MOLLY'S KITCHEN & LOUNGE
1611CalleLorca 983-7577 Ol
MONROE'S
727 Cerrillos Road 989-7575 O 5
PASOUAL'S
121 Don Caspar 983-9340 O ?
P.C.'S RESTAURANT & LOUNGE
3795 Cerrillos Road 473-7164 OI
PEPPERS RESTAURANT & CANTINA
2239 Old Pecos Trail 984-2272 O "f
RANCHO DE CHIMAYO
Chimayo 984-2100 O 'i
SALSA'S
(Double Tree Club Hotel)
3347 Cerrillos Road 438-0691 O i
113 1/2 East Palace Avenue 982-9030 O2
TECOLOTE CAFE
1203 Cerrillos Road 988-1362 O
TIA SOPHIA'S
211) West San Francisco Street 983-9880 CD
TINY-S RESTAURANT & LOUNGE
1015 Pen Road 983-VH17 I ] r
TCMMASITA'S CAFE
500 South Cuadalupe Street 983-5721 CD i
TORTILLA FLATS
3139 Cerrillos Road 471-8685 Or
WILLIE'S CANTINA
802 Canyon Road 986-3833 S
PERUVIAN
ALFREDO'S
720 St. Michael's Drive 438-3876 CD?
PIZZA
CARMEN'S CHICAGO PIZZA
1201 Cerrillos Road 989-1919
DOMINO'S PIZZA
2801 Rodeo Road 473-1672
DOMINO'S PIZZA
Pen Road Shopping Center 984-3030
HOME RUN PIZZA
3662 Cerrillos Road, A4 473-1400
HOME RUN PIZZA
903 West Alameda 984-8494
234 North Guadalupe Street 988-2007 5
H. VICINO WOOD OVEN PfZZA
321 West San Francisco Strwit 986-8700 i i V
PIZZA ETC.
De Vargas Mall 986-1500
PIZZA HUT
Villa Linda Mall 471-2494
PIZZA HUT
4250 Cerrillos Road 473-3536
PIZZA HUT
1947 Cerrillos Road 988-2874 ?
PIZZA HUT
720 St. Michael's Drive (Delivery Only) 471-1010
422 West Water Street 820-0002
329 Old Santa Fe Trail 9834140 5
SEAFOOD
CAFE DEL MAR
706 St. Michael's Drive 438-0880 OS?
50 Lincoln Avenue 983-8687 OI
RED LOBSTER
4450 Rodeo Road 473-1610 OI
STEAKSMJTH AT EL GANCHO
Old Las Vegas Highway 988-3333 Ol
CELEBRATIONS
613 Canyon Road 989-8904 OI
COYOTE CAFE
132 West Water Street 983-1615 Of
ELDORADO COURT
(Eldorado Hotel)
30* West San Francisco Street 988-4455 O I
GERONIMO
724 Canyon Road 982-1500 CD I
MANAMA
(Inn of the Governors)
234 Don Caspar Avenue 982-4333 OI
OLD HOUSE RESTAURANT A TAVERN
(Eldorado Hotel)
309 West San Francisco Street 9884455 O I
SANTA FE MUSIC HALL
100 North Guadalupe Street 983-3311 OI
THE ANASAZI RESTAURANT
(Inn of the Anasazi)
113 Washington Avenue 988-3236 OI
SPANISH
EL FAROL
808 Canyon Road 983-9912 OI
STEAK
AUSTIN'S STEAK & SALOON
2400 Cerrillos Road 471-4652 OI
BULLRING
First Interstate Plaza
150 Washington Avenue 983-3328 OI
ELNIDO
Tesuque 988-4340 OI
HOOF AND HEELS
Rodeo Road West 473-0482
VANESSJE OF SANTA FE
434 West San Francisco Street 982-9966 O I
WESTERN SIZZUN STEAK HOUSE
3006 Cerrillos Road 473-3642 O
THAI
STAR OF SIAM
2860 Cerrillos Road 438-8644 O 2
TIBETAN
THE TIBET CAFE
403 Canyon Road 989-8466 O
HEALTHY DAVID'S CAFE
418 Cerrillos Road 982-4147
THE NATURAL CAFE
1494 Cerrillos Road 983-1411 O 5 O
-------
Notes
-------
Notes
-------
Tribal Nonpoint Source Planning
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
Washington, DC 20460
xxx-x-97-xxx
January 1997
Tribal Nonpoint Source
Planning Handbook
FINAL DRAFT January 1997
-------
The images throughout this publication were
designed by Turtle Heart, Ojibway artist.
Water Woman's Morning Song (cover)
Eagle is the instrument, the living prayer of our contract
with the Creation to live in balance and cooperation with
nature. Water Woman, shaped like the Moon, is from the
Woodlands teachings passed on by the clan mothers
regarding the proper caretaking of water. She pours the
river of life from an Eagle Feather, gathering it from the
four directions, and it passes over and through every
living thing on the earth. The plant life indicates the
responsibility we have to the rootsto that which is
below the surface of our immediate attention. The River
ends where the clouds begin, and there we find the Heart-
Dreaming serpent that is the link between our life close to
the earth and the open heart of the Creation, the world of
nature. Thunder and Rain, at the end, are symbols of
what the elders have called "the waiting world"perhaps
the outstretched hopes of the generations yet to be born.
Following the place where the Sun rises, Turtle appears
from the disk of the Sun and Moon, exercising patience
and deliberate movements in its celebration of life. The
image concludes with the partly revealed Turtle, symbol
of the Earth itself. Turtle is partly revealed to symbolize
our incomplete journey through this life, as well as our
need to know more and do more to take care'ofthe
Earth's rich resources.
(continued inside back cover)
-------
fc
United States Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Contents
Introduction 1
Overview of Nonpoint Source Pollution 1
Requirements fora Section 319(h) Grant 2
Approval by EPA 3
Nonpoint Source Assessment Report 5
Model for a Nonpoint Source Assessment Report 5
Templates:
Overview 7
Introduction 7
Methodology 7
Land Use Summary 8
Surface Water Quality Summary 9
Results 12
Discussion 13
Selection of Best Management Practices 14
Nonpoint Source Control Programs 16
Conclusions 17
References 17
Appendices 17
Acronym List 17
Sources 18
Nonpoint Source Management Program 19
Model for a Nonpoint Source Management Program 20
Templates:
Overview 21
Introduction 21
Management Program Summary 23
Management Program 23
Existing Authorities and Programs 25
References 26
Appendices 26
Acronym List 27
Sources 27
Section 319(h) Grant Application 29
Background 29
Key Concepts 30
Contents 30
Templates:
Cover Letter 32
Eligibility Determination 32
Grant Proposal and Work Plan 36
List of Contacts 43
References 47
-------
Introduction
This document provides guidance and practical templates for tribes interested in
obtaining federal funds to manage nonpoint source pollution under section 319(h)
of the Clean Water Act. Specifically, it describes the 31900 process and updates
previously released section 319(h) guidance.
Overview of Nonpoint Source Pollution
State, territorial, and tribal reports show that nonpoint source pollution is respon-
sible for more than half of the nation's remaHiung;walฃr quality problems (USEPA,
1992). It occurs when rainfall, snowmelt/or imgation'riins over land or through the
ground, picks up pollutants, and deposits them into rivers; takes, or the ocean or
introduces them into ground water. < ,',. -"/^,,/; ~''^~"\',-f';'-
X'v. '"*-,. %\' V~,~-v\ v''"
Though the relative impact fror^;a fe^nonp'ointsources might be small, the cumu-
lative impact from many nonpoiht, sources .degrad&Tvyater quality (USEPA, 1994b).
Sources of nonpoint pqHuSbh" include^ agriculturj;forestry, urban runoff, abandoned
mines, constTuction^ao^ties^a^ซ5hydjr<>rftOdific^tion, such as the building and
maintenance of darrik;and;levies,\<|rthef sources include improper lawn and garden
maintenance; ,fe^^se|^csy|te)fnsViaipr6p^er construction of marinas and careless
boating habits; storm drain dumping; and poor siting and design of roads, high-
ways, and Abridges. Atmospheri^fdeppsition of pollutants originating from power
plants, factories, trucks^andJautoinbbiles is also considered a source of nonpoint
pollution. ^I'^A^,'/-' Tj
In 1987, Congress addetpections 319 and 518 to the Clean Water Act to enable
states, territories, and tribes to address the problems caused by nonpoint source
pollution. Section 319 established baseline requirements for state and territorial
nonpoint source management programs and authorized national funding to support
implementation of approved management programs. Section 518 authorized EPA to
treat federally recognized Indian tribes in the same manner as states. (USEPA,
1994b).
Section 319 is the
principal source of
federal funding
specifically
dedicated to
preventing and
managing nonpoint
source pollution.
-------
Tribes are now
required to submit
a single
application,
without the need
for a separate
application for
"treatment as a
state."
Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act is the principal source of U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) funding dedicated to nonpoint source control. Under
section 319(h), Congress appropriates money to EPA for controlling nonpoint source
pollution. EPA distributes this money to eligible states, territories, and tribes based
on an allocation formula. Section 319 reserves one-third of 1 percent of national
319(h) program funds for tribes. In fiscal year 1995, four tribes successfully applied
for $255,000 out of the $330,000 available to tribes for that year under section
319(h). EPA annually awards section 319(h) grants to tribes that submit approvable
nonpoint source pollution control programs on a first-come, first-served basis.
Money that EPA does not award during one fiscal year is carried over for use
during the following fiscal year. Each grant awarded under section 319(h) requires
a 40 percent nonfederal match. If a tribe demonstrates a special financial need,
however, EPA may and frequently does approve a 10 percent nonfederal match.
Examples of tribal projects that have received awards under section 319(h) include
the following (USEPA, 1994b):
Poarch Band of Creek Indians - Constructed wetlands to reduce pollution
from agricultural runoff.
Campo Indian Tribe - Restored lost vegetation and habitat to reduce
erosion and improve water quality along Campo Creek.
Colville Tribes - Completed the Buffalo Creek Restoration Project, which
restored the stream and returned it to a natural ecosystem.
Tribes should work with EPA's Regional Nonpoint Source (NPS) Coordinators and
Tribal Coordinators, as well as state nonpoint sotjrce.ihanagement agencies, during
preparation of nonpoint source assessments and management programs. Refer to
the list of contacts at the end of this document for information on the EPA staff who
manage nonpoint source control grants/Thts-list_alscftttdkates which states are in
each of the 10 EPA Regions. "vT, ;\' ,-'*; ",,
~ * ' " *
Requirements for a Section 319(h) Grant
Tribes interested in obtaisahg'section 319(tj;}',furids will be required to submit a
package containing.several documents-to*the-appropriate EPA Regional Office. The
documents include:'-- \: ''"*'^ฃ "#"
' -r^/'X -/":;;-/"''-''
(1) Nonpoint source .assessment report. The nonpoint source assessment
report describes existing and potential nonpoint-source-related water quality
problems on tribal lands^using existing water quality data. The report identifies
the nature, extent, and-effect of nonpoint source pollution and the causes of
such pollution. It shBuld also describe existing programs and methods used for
controlling the pollution (USEPA, 1987). This report has to be approved by the
appropriate EPA Regional Office.
(2) Management program. The nonpoint source management program
describes how the tribe intends to correct and/or prevent the existing and
potential nonpoint source problems identified in the assessment report over the
four fiscal years following submission of the program. If the tribe is unable to
develop a nonpoint source management program that addresses all nonpoint
source categories, the management program can focus on nonpoint sources
-------
identified as priorities. The management program must also be approved by the
appropriate EPA Regional Office.
(3) Grant application. The grant application requests funding to support a
particular activity or activities described in the approved management program
- or related to the solution of a nonpoint source problem identified in the assess-
ment report. The application must include a work plan describing how the
requested 319(h) funds will be used and establishing dates for accomplishing
specific milestones (USEPA, 1994a). EPA evaluates the proposal and work plan.
(4) Documentation of tribal eligibility. A tribe must establish tribal eligibility
to obtain a section 319(h) grant. This process was formerly known as qualifying
for "treatment as a state." To meet the eligibility requirements, the tribe must:
Be federally recognized.
Demonstrate that it has substantial governmental duties.
Demonstrate that it has legal authority or jurisdiction to carry out the
purposes of the grant on tribal lands.
Demonstrate its capability to carry out the activities proposed in the grant
application. EPA considers the approved assessment report, management
program, and grant application sufficient evidence of the tribe's capability.
Necessary documentation of the other elements of tribal eligibility are
discussed in greater detail in the "grant process" section of this handbook
on pages 32-34.
Approval by EPA /-
In addition to reviewing the tribal 3 l${h) application for; approval at the regional
level, EPA Regional Offices send the cpmpfee tribal section 319(h) application
package to the Nonpoint Source Contetol Brafich it EPA Headquarters in Washington,
DC, for Headquarters' concurrence Jt^4Vsf'^^pf;' - <>
:'?',. ',' '- 'sJ'-4"..' y.-O -"
(1) It is the first tribai'a^B<ปtioAfor^$eซton,^;i9(h) grant in the Region.
(2) The tribe has not received'a fav^rable'*Eligibility Determination" under other
EPA grant programs, siieh as Clear* Water Act section 104(b), 106, or 314.
At EPA Headquarters, these complete application packages are reviewed for ap-
proval in the Office of-Water, ihe Office of General Counsel, and the Office of
Enforcement and Com^ffiaice* Assurance.
If other tribes in the Region have already received section 319(h) program
approval and if the tribe submitting the 319(h) application has already received
a favorable "Eligibility Determination" ruling under other EPA programs, the por-
tions of the tribal section 319(h) application package relating to tribal eligibility are
reviewed and approved in the Regional Office only. The grant application, nonpoint
source assessment report and nonpoint source management program, together with
a brief memorandum recommending approval of the grant, are then forwarded by
the Region to Headquarters for determination of the final grant amount.
Funding awarded
through section
319(h) requires a
40 percent
nonfederal match.
-------
Once a tribe has received an initial 319(h) grant through the process described
above, it is automatically eligible for a section 319(h) grant in subsequent years. A
tribe need only submit an acceptable grant proposal and work plan to the Regional
Office setting forth what it proposes to accomplish with the new grant. EPA Regions
will review the proposal for consistency with the tribe's assessment report and
management program and forward the proposal, with its recommendation, to
Headquarters for a determination of the final grant amount. Because the amount of
funds available for section 319(h) grants to tribes is limited, the tribal funds will
continue to be managed by EPA Headquarters.
-------
NONPOINT SOURCE ASSESSMENT
REPORT
The nonpoint source assessment report should include four categories of information:
(1) An identification of navigable waters that cannot be expected to attain or
maintain tribal water quality standards without the control of nonpoint source
pollution.
(2) An identification of the categories and subcategories of nonpoint source pollu-
tion that contribute to the water quality problem for the individual waters
identified in paragraph (1). For a listing ofiiiajor nonpoint source pollution
categories and subcategories, refer to the'latest Gttidelines for the Preparation of
State Water Quality Assessments (3050) |&p6m),!jHiblished by EPA.
/'. ;'ซ ^
(3) A description of how the tribe will identify ttfce best management practices
(BMPs) needed to control eacli category^aad-?ubcategory of nonpoint source
pollution identified in paragraph (2), as well as a description of how the man-
agement practices will be used t<> redraeJth'elevel of pollution resulting from
these sources. Such factors as pabtte-pattidpation and inter/intragovernmental
coordination should be included.Y ' ' \. V
v j ' * -' r, ", -;?
(4) A description ofaiiy,easting ttibali staie, federal, and other programs that
might be'ซse4^Jfor%>ntrolH^'
-------
Reference Documentation. Nonpoint source data collected by states and tribes
under section 106 of the Clean Water Act may already exist. With this information,
tribes can assess nonpoint source pollution problems and determine baseline water
quality data without completing additional water quality surveys. States and tribes
can also use the data collected with section 106 funds to help identify high-priority
problems.
Components. The following sections should be included in the nonpoint source
assessment report:
Cover - The cover should contain at least a title and the date (month and year) of
the assessment.
Contents - The contents should consist of the heading of each major section of
the assessment report and its page number.
List of tables - If tables are included in the nonpoint source assessment report, a
separate list should identify each table and its page number.
List of figures - If figures are included, a separate list should identify each figure
and its page number.
List of appendices - If appendices are included, a separate list should identify each
appendix.
Main body of report - The sections that follow serve as a model for the content
of each section of the nonpoint source assessment report.
.-f;'-.': - >s-
Overview /'- }."' '"-'..-
Introduction / ', ~ _,,, \f '-/',
Methodology f \ '--:,;f ,': '--4;-,-;
Land Use Summary >''';," vv ?; **"''
Surface and Ground Water Summary 4'l-
Results .,,, \ ;;""'-ซ-; --"^ *'
Discussion A "~ - / ,-f'" ,-
Selection ofJJMPs -; ; - '*'f. /".-'
Nonpoint Source Control Programs:-!
Conclusions, , ; ,'- *
Reference's^ _ _ ~,^\ _', ~ ,""";,,,/-''
Appendices Ctf
Acronyms- ^
-------
Nonpoint Source Assessment Report
For the most part, the examples that follow have been drawn from approved tribal
nonpoint source assessment reports and management programs.
OVERVIEW
In the overview, state the purpose of the report and explain the need for a nonpoint
source assessment report for the tribal lands. Also provide a general summary of
the analysis that will follow, stressing major .conclusions and broad areas of
concern. Discuss only significant data and general findings in this section. The
section should be concise and ideally should not exceed one page in length.
Example (VTNRDEC, 1988):
Four statewide water quality assessments completed in 1988 greatly increased the
information base for this report. These include assessments of point and nonpoint source
pollution influencing rivers and streams; lakes and ponds; ground water; and an assess-
ment of toxic pollutant sources. Some degree of threat was estimated to exist for 908 river
miles or 20% of those which fully support their uses at the present time. A higher level of
threat (86%) was attributed to the uses of 153,319 acres of lakes which presently fully
support their uses.
Nonpoint sources are the most widespread sources of water pollution. The four most
common nonpoint types of water quality impairments in rivers are siltation/turbidity,
habitat alterations, nutrient enrichment, and flow alterations. Other common problems are
thermal modifications and pathogens. The most significant sources of these impairments
were agricultural runoff, hydromodification below hydropower dams and erosion from
construction sites.
INTRODUCTION
.
The introduction includes the goals aadvob|ectives of^he nonpoint source assess-
ment report. A goal stateme^rnight^^to^ldekrf^^he.-nature and extent or threat
of nonpoint source polli^a-6a!tribai^ads,aB.3^ซraaters.'' Objectives are more
* _,*'," -./-;- -: '" ;' " 1 f ^.'f:: 0-. J-- ,*'"^v Mv.-!'' J
specific, measurable |fatfon$ ^'intentions; thalflead'to achievement of the goal(s).
\^ '- ,, - \ , ,' V "\ :'*
'' ' ' '
Example (CTUIR. 1994):
The goal of the Assessment and Management Plan is to provide guidance for future
efforts to effectively and efficiently address nonpoint sources of water pollution on the
Umatilla Indian Reservation and throughout the Umatilla River watershed. The objectives of
the Assessment and Management Plan are (1) to document water quality and watershed
conditions, (2) to draw linkages between upstream-downstream and channel-upslope
conditions, and (3) to elucidate a broad approach (technical, policy, and legal issues) to
address currently degraded conditions.
METHODOLOGY
In the methodology section, describe how and where the data for the analysis of the
nonpoint sources of pollution were obtained. Also describe any uncommon soft-
-------
ware or evaluation techniques. Describe thoroughly how the study was conducted,
as well as any assumptions made in the analysis. In addition, include a listing of all
documents referenced and environmental specialists contacted. Details to be
included are (FPAST, 1993a):
Explanations of abbreviations or classifications developed specifically for the
assessment (e.g., "Drainage areas were divided into subunits for more precise
analysis of the tribal waters").
Types of sampling and purpose of the sampling (e.g., macroinvertebrates, metal
concentrations, nutrient loadings, concentrations of particular toxic substances).
Assumptions made during the course of the.analysis (e.g., "Water quality
assessments for each surface waterbody were completed based on the state
surface water classification system and the uses designated for each").
Example (CTUIR, 1994):
Direct contacts to secure data were made with state and federal agencies. Data were
primarily accessed through EPA Region 10's STORET water quality data base. Information
obtained from STORET had as its primary sources the USDI-Bureau of Reclamation, USDA-
Forest Service, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and the USDI-Geological
Survey/Oregon Water Resources Department. Information (primarily stream temperature)
was also obtained directly from the Pendleton office of the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) Fisheries
Program. Ground water quality data from sporadic sampling (primarily 1987-1990) was
obtained from CTUIR Water Resources Program. Summarized data on ground water was
also obtained from Oregon's Statewide Assessment of Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution.
Other potential sources which were contacted but from which no data were obtained were
the Oregon Department of Forestry, the Columbia-Blue Mountain Resource Conservation
and Development Council, the Umatilla County Soil and Water Conservation District, and the
USDA-Agricultural Research Service.
Water quality information in STORET is geo-referenced by latitude and longitude and
therefore we were able to create a geographic information system (GIS) layer of sampling/
monitoring locations. This was overlaid on the 1:100,000 EPA River Reach file obtained from
the Oregon State GIS Service Center located in the Oregon Department of Energy in Salem.
An additional overlay was created by CTUIR staff of "subwatersheds" based on watershed
boundaries, sampling/monitoring stations, and land use. The map of River Reaches, with
sampling/monitoring locations and subwatershed boundary overlays, was created at the
1:250,000 scale.
LAND US
The purpose of this section ts tq describe in general the existing conditions on the
tribal lands. Begin this section with a description of the tribal lands and include a
map of the area as well as a Regional location map of the area.
>.. 's
-------
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Figure 1. Fort Peck Indian Reservation
A brief description of land use's and socioeconomic conditions is also included in this
section. X:
Example fEBCI, 1993a cited in USEPA. 1994a>:
The Cherokee lands in North Carolina consist of approximately 56,000 acres, of which 48,688
acres are located in Swain and Jackson counties. Since the majority of the land and water
resources which comprise the reservation are located in Swain and Jackson counties, this
area alone represents the target of this assessment. The remaining lands in Cherokee and
Graham counties present a "checkerboard" pattern, and the tribe does not own sufficient
tracts of land to have any control over the water quality of the streams involved. These areas
will be assessed at a later date, as funding is available, to determine what measures are
needed to prevent/correct nonpoint source pollution problems from these lands. Consider-
ation will be given to adopting state water quality standards for these areas in Cherokee and
Graham counties.
The Cherokee Indian Reservation is located in the southern Appalachian Mountains of
western North Carolina. Thin soils and steep topography characterize the land as highly
erodible. Much of the land on the reservation is covered in timber, and tribal members
frequently log individual tracts of land. Developed land is utilized for housing, public
buildings, and commercial structures associated with tourism (i.e., motels, restaurants,
attractions). Other tourist attractions include trout fishing and camping.
SURFACE AND GROUND WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
The purpose of this section is to thoroughly describe the existing conditions of the
tribal waters. A detailed map of the reservation waters and a complete description
of the waters are the focus of this section.
-------
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Figure 2. Stream Basins - Fort Peck Indian Reservation
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Porcupine-Milk River Drainage -The Porcupine-Milk River Drainage is located on the west
side of the reservation. The Porcupine is a C-3 classification. Waters classified C-3 are
suitable for bathing; swimming and recreation; and growth and propagation of non-
salmonid fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl, and furbearers. The quality of these
waters is naturally marginal for drinking, culinary and food processing purposes, agriculture,
and industrial water supply. The existing land uses are predominantly rangeland, dryland
crop agriculture, and limited irrigated lands. The dryland crop agriculture is characterized by
strip fallow operations and associated saline seeps common to the northern great plains.
Land ownership is a mix of fee title, allotted, trust, and tribal lands.
Biological Condition Values over the past 3 years for this drainage range from 23 (severe)
to 50 (moderate). The habitat impairment values on the Porcupine range from 62 to 88 out of
total score of 100. The supportability rating ranges from partial support to full support over
the past 3 years. Some sections rated full support, but threatened.
Describe all surface'water!fbl gnttttgl water-hydrology and quality. Include
appropriate ,grapMc$ MghUghMft^exisfittg water quality conditions. They should be
in chart or iatstlat formJwh^revei possible for ease of reading and interpretation.
'^ :/A X',, .'"-- '^-J'
-------
Example (VTNRDEC, 1988a):
90TJ
FULUf (UPMWTIO
MlTt
PARTIAL SUPPORT
3>tl
NOT SUPPORTED
24*.)
STREAM yiLEI
%THREATENED
PARTIAL SUPPORT
7.4
ซ NOT SUPPORTED
4.7
ปFULLY SUPPORTED
703
PEHCZirr OF STREAM MILE*
Figure 3. Use Support Status for Assessed Rivers and Streams - Vermont State Summary
Existing nonpoint source pollution reduction programs for the tribal lands should be
identified and generally discussed in this section. These programs may be tribal,
local, state, or federal programs used by the tribe that deal with nonpoint source
management on tribal lands.
Example 1 (EBCI, 1993a cited in USEPA. 1994s):
The Tribe has a limited number of programs in place to deal with issues related to nonpoint
source pollution. The Tribe has begun an environmental education program to alert tribal
members to the various types of pollution and to activities that assist in protecting the
environment. For erosion and sediment control, a sediment catch basin has been con-
structed at the Tribal landfill to control sediment loss during storm events.
Example 2 (VTNRDEC, 1988a):
Programs for controlling nonpoint sources of pollution continue to evolve and have included
initiatives at local, state, and federal levels. A state strategy for identifying and reducing
nonpoint source problems was designed as early as February 1975. Nonpoint source control
programs that have been developed and are being implemented across Vermont are
presented below by nonpoint source category.
Agriculture - Federal programs for controlling agricultural nonpoint source pollution in
Vermont provide opportunities for landowners to voluntarily cooperate with one of
fourteen Natural Resources Conservation Districts throughout Vermont in order to become
eligible for federal financial and technical assistance from the USDA's Agriculture Stabiliza-
tion and Conservation Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Federal
programs in Vermont to control agricultural nonpoint sources include the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Program, the Resource Conservation and Development
Program, the Rural Clean Water Program, and the Agricultural Conservation Program.
-------
RESULTS
In this section, present the available scientific information related to nonpoint
source pollution on the tribal lands. Also provide data tables for surface water and'
ground water. Include details such as the following:
Name of the waterbody.
Size/length.
Pollutant identified in the segment or cause of impairment (source of
pollutant, if possible).
Severity of impairment.
Example (CTUIR, 1994):
Waterbody
Porcupine/
Sargent Creek
Porcupine/
Lower Fork
Stream
(miles)
12
32
Pollutant
NH3, Fe, P
Source
Grazing,
Roads
Temperature Agriculture
Severity
Moderate
Moderate
Discuss each major type of water quality parameter or pollutant (e.g., fecal
coliform, total suspended solids, phosphorus, toxics) and identify waterbodies
moderately or severely impacted by each. //?"^
Example 1 (CTUIR. 1994):
Bacteria Either one or both of the state water quality criteria for fecal coliform bacteria and
enterococcus are frequently exceeded for the Umatilla River below the Umatilla Indian
Reservation, Butter Creek, Birch Creek, McKay Creek, and parts of Wildhorse Creek. Very
high levels of coliform bacteria are recorded at the Umatilla River at Rieth station. Sources
are municipal wastewater treatment facilities, individual septic/drainfield systems, confined
animal feeding areas, soil from surface or streambank/bed erosion.
Stream Temperature - This parameter has the best monitoring coverage, both in terms of
geographic extent and period of record. The state water quality standard for stream
temperature, 68ฐ F (20ฐ C), is exceeded throughout the Umatilla River Basin for an
extended period each year, usually mid-June through mid-September. The only exceptions
are the North Fork Umatilla River and Buck Creek, both of which are in the North Fork
Umatilla Wilderness Area on the Umatilla National Forest; temperatures above 68ฐ F occur
infrequently. The primary causes of high stream temperatures are removal of riparian
vegetation (habitat alteration), water withdrawal (flow alteration), and irrigation return flow.
Example 2 (FPAST, 1993a):
Nutrients - Nutrients of concern on the Reservation are nitrogen and phosphorus. They
originate from fertilizers, animal and human wastes, urban runoff, and natural sources.
Nutrients may stimulate excessive growth of algae in rivers or nuisance aquatic weeds in
lakes and reservoirs, rendering water aesthetically unattractive or unsuitable for recreation.
Grazing and farming practices on the Reservation contribute to increased nutrient levels. A
"threshold" value of 0.1 mg/L total phosphorus is exceeded for the Umatilla River from
below Gibbon to the mouth and in Wildhorse and McKay Creeks. In addition, ground water
has been impacted by nitrates.
-------
Summary tables are also effective in documenting the impacts of various pollutants.
Tables should include, at a minimum, the information provided in the example below.
Example (VTNRDEC, 1988a>:
Pollutant
Pathogens
Thermal modification
Nutrient
Major Impact (miles)"'
64.2
116.3
205.0
Minor Impact (miles)
174.4
358.4
121.6
Analyze the data according to category of nonpoint source pollution (e.g., agricul-
ture, silviculture, urban, construction). Identify the waterbodies affected by each
category and the severity of impacts. For each category, identify nonpoint source
pollution subcategories if possible. For a listing of major nonpoint source pollution
categories and subcategories, refer to the latest Guidelines for the Preparation of State
Water Quality Assessments (305(b) Reports), published by EPA.
Example (EBCI, 1993a cited in USEPA, 1994a):
Waterbody Cause Source (subcategory)
Raven Fork
siltation
PH
silviculture
(road maintenance)
other
(atmospheric deposition)
Degree of Imoact
moderate
high
organic agriculture
enrichment (hog feedlot)
Bunches Creek organic land disposal
enrichment, (septic tanks)
siltation construction
(land development)
DISCUSSION
In this sertion^SisctsAtheOTlijrmatioii presented in the Results section. Highlight
the waters ^lare"iHtpa1redbynonpointsource pollution and require nonpoint
source control measured Identify; the categories of nonpoint source pollution (e.g.,
agriculture, silviculture, construction) that are causing the majority of the impaired
water uses, and rarKl9i|tdf!iii!d on the amount of quantifiable impairment. In
addition, include a desoipitton of the relationship between nonpoint source pollution
and specific impaired water quality parameters, as well as any subsequent effects.
-------
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Excess salts in the water supply due to nonpoint source pollution are impairing water
used for livestock watering and irrigation.
High nutrient levels in drinking water that are generated by agricultural runoff are
increasing the risk of human health problems.
High sedimentation rates caused by upstream construction are destroying vital fish
spawning habitat.
SELECTION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The purpose of this section is to identify the established process for selecting best
management practices (BMPs) on the tribal lands. Include in this section:
1. Core participants. In addition to listing the agency(ies), orgamzation(s), or
task force(s) responsible for BMP selection, briefly describe their mission
statements and membership composition.
Example (VTNRDEC, 1988a):
The process to identify BMPs has been conducted in conjunction with the Vermont Nonpoint
Source Task Force. The Task Force was established by the Secretary of the State Agency of
Natural Resources in part to secure public participation in the nonpoint source control
planning process. Membership consists of 20 representatives from a broad range of
organizations including the Vermont Department of Agriculture, the Natural Resources
Conservation Districts, Soil Conservation Service, private consultants, the Home Builders
Association of Northern Vermont, and others listed in the Appendix.
The Task Force adopted the following mission statement: 'To prepare by August 4,1988,
portions of a four-year management program for nonpoint source pollution in Vermont as
required by the 1987 Amendments to the Federal Clean Water Act; specifically, (1) to
identify or develop BMPs for controlling each of these sources of nonpoint pollution; (2) to
identify most appropriate means of implementing the BMPs; (3) to estimate the relative
significance of various sources of nonpoint pollution in Vermont such as agriculture,
silviculture, construction, urban runoff, and water course modification; and (4) to solicit
public comment on these conclusions."
With the aid of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, the Task Force
examined the technical standards for all major nonpoint sources of pollutants identified in
Vermont, including agricultural operations, hydropower facilities, and construction sites.
Seven were recognized by the Task Force as having water pollution control standards
which are either inadequate or which need further study for technical adequacy. Where there
were two standards, the Task Force recommended the BMP which should be favored as the
"state standard" for a specified source. Although the Task Force is concerned with emerging
problems, the highest priority is to assure that appropriate standards exist for the most
serious nonpoint sources and to conduct further assessment on those sources which have
led to serious impacts.
In addition to Task Force review of technical standards, BMPs are routinely evaluated by
the Agency of Natural Resources. The Agency is continually upgrading its own rules and
policies and urging other federal and state agencies to do the same with their own
standards.
-------
Also identify the level of participation for each agency, organization, or task
force. Examples of levels of participation include:
Technical assistance
Education
Demonstration projects
.. Financial assistance ...
2. Public participation and governmental coordination. In this section,
highlight the use of public participation and public comment in the process of
selecting BMPs and any inter/intragovernmental coordination.
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Tribal Council procedure provides public participation and public comment. A resolution
authorizes submittal of the assessment plan to other federal agencies. Section 319 of the
Federal Clean Water Act requires each tribe to describe tribal and local programs for
controlling pollution from nonpoint sources. There are numerous programs, administered by
a variety of agencies, which aim to control nonpoint source pollution. County conservation
districts are designated the nonpoint source management agencies for non-federal lands.
The program is intended to encourage adoption and implementation of BMPs. Technical
assistance, education, demonstration projects, and financial assistance are used to imple-
ment BMPs.
3. Specific programs. Discuss any specific programs (e.g., U.S. Department of
Agriculture cost-share programs) that have been contacted for BMP selection
assistance. An example of the appropriate level of detail follows.
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
The U.S. Department of Agriculture cost-share programs offer financial incentives for
implementation of BMPs on agricultural lands on the Fort Peck Reservation. The Corps of
Engineers' 404 Dredge and Fill Permit Program controls nonpoint source pollution resulting
from hydromodification activities. The Montana Salinity Control Association, a consortium of
conservation districts in dryland farming areas, provides educational and technical assis-
tance to implement agricultural management practices to control saline seep.
The Tribal Water Resource Control Commission conducts water quality monitoring, assesses
and prioritizes nonpoint and point source problems, develops solutions, and provides
management of these problems. A priority list is kept of stream segments and lakes that
have assessed man-caused water quality problems. The list is used to focus and conserve
limited management resources.
-------
4. Existing BMPs. Describe existing BMPs, organized by category of nonpoint
source pollution. A table is a straightforward way of listing the existing BMPs.
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Agriculture BMPs
BMP
Channel vegetation
Fencing
Crop residue use
Windbreak renovation
Range seeding
Nonpoint Source Category (subcategorv)
Dry land crop production
Feedlots/animal holding
Dryland crop production.
Irrigated crop production
Dryland crop production
Rangeland/grazing
5. Pollution reduction. Finally, include a description of the process that will
be used to reduce the level of pollution resulting from identified nonpoint
sources of water pollution.
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Fort Peck's Section 319 program will emphasize agriculture. The process for identifying
BMPs for this category will consist of adopting USDA-Natural Resources Conservation
Service Field Office Technical Guide standards.
Agriculture The BMPs selected from the Natural Resources Conservation Service
standards and specifications are currently in use by a majority of the producers on the
reservation. Additional BMPs addressing pesticide application, fertilizer management, and
streambank stabilization may need to be added. One or more BMPs known as a resource
management system will be selected for each land use within a targeted watershed. Proper
application of a resource management system will ensure the nonpoint source pollution is
minimized. Cooperating agencies will develop new BMPs if appropriate ones do not exist to
solve a specific problem.
Utilization of agricultural BMPs for nonpoint source water pollution control on Fort Peck is
voluntary. Success in solving nonpoint source pollution problems has been limited primarily
to smaller streams and projects.
NONPOINT SOURCE ^CONTROL PROGRAMS
For each category .of nonpoint s6ttrcepollution (e.g., agriculture, silviculture,
urban), identify and describe\all-4Vaikble programs for controlling nonpoint
sources of pollution t^gafdkssF of whether they are currently being used on the
tribal lands. These-shpukl include tribal, local, state, or federal programs that deal
with nonpoint source pollution management on the reservation.
Example (FPAST, 1993a; VTNRDEC, 1988a):
Agricultural Conservation Program
Acceptable Management Practices for Maintaining Water Quality on Logging Jobs
Corps of Engineers' 404 Dredge and Fill Permit Program
State Land Use and Development Control Laws
-------
CONCLUSIONS
This section provides a summary of the key findings of the nonpoint source
assessment report and lists special concerns. Identify the category(ies) of nonpoint
source pollution that is/are most detrimental and will be targeted through the
section 319 program.
Example (FPAST, 1993a):
Four nonpoint source categories are responsible for a significant fraction of the threatened
or impaired waterbodies on the reservation: agriculture, hydromodification, mining, and
land disposal. BMPs have been developed and are identified in the Fort Peck nonpoint
source management plan. Fort Peck's Section 319 program will emphasize agriculture. The
process for identifying BMPs for this category will consist of adopting USDA-Natural
Resources Conservation Service Field Office Technical Guide standards.
The BMPs selected from the NRCS standards and specification are currently in use by a
majority of the producers on the reservation. Additional BMPs addressing pesticide
application, fertilizer management and streambank stabilization may need to be added.
. Cooperating agencies will develop new BMPs if appropriate ones do not exist to solve a
specific problem.
REFERENCES
This section provides bibliographic information on sources cited or referred to in the
text of the report.
APPENDICES
Include in the appendices additional infommHdnJtfiat'lslmdortant to the understand-
rr '--' ,;i, 'f- ~-- **
ing of a certain section of the report, butnotsighificant enoygh to be included in the
body of the text. This material should be suppleriieritary to the information pre-
sented in the body of the text. ,, ~ " ''""i'\ - ; "^C '
Example (FPAST. 1993a; VTNRDEC, 1988a):
Criteria for designated use support classification.
Documentation of pollution sources affecting tribal rivers and streams.
Selected portions of toxics assessment reports that are relevant to tribal waters.
Membership lists for local nonpoint source task forces and member affiliations.
Current ground water nonpoint source pollution assessment reports.
Descriptions of Waterbody System information categories.
Relevant tribal government resolutions relating to nonpoint source pollution.
ACRONYM LIST
In this section, provide a list of acronyms used throughout the nonpoint source
assessment report.
-------
Sources
Documents that might provide additional assistance during the preparation of'a
nonpoint source assessment report include:
Waterbody System Users Manual (WBS 1996) - Available from USEPA Regional
Offices (August 1995)
Supplemental EPA Region VIII Guidance: Water Quality Standards for Indian Tribes
- USEPA, Region 8, Water Management Division (June 1995)
Guidelines for the Preparation of the 1996 State Water Quality Assessments
(305(b) Reports) - USEPA, Office of Water (May 1995) (updated every 2 years)
A Tribal Guide to the Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Grant Program - USEPA,
Office of Water (September 1994)
Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in
Coastal Waters - USEPA, Office of Water (January 1993)
Reference Guide to Water Quality Standards for Indian Tribes - USEPA, Office of
Water (January 1990)
Nonpoint Source Guidance - USEPA, Office of Water (December 1987)
Surface Water and Wetlands Protection Program Operating Guidance FY1988 -
USEPA, Office of Water (April 1987) ^ "\ -
-------
Nonpoint Source
Management Program
The management program is a multiyear (usually 4-year) strategy document
designed to bring nonpoint sources of pollution under control. Based on the find-
ings of the nonpoint source assessment report, the management program becomes
the foundation of each tribe's section 319(h) program. The management program
identifies reservation-wide activities, as well as watershed-level projects, for imple-
menting management practices for high-priority nonpoint source problems and
provides a schedule for their implementation. The six types of information required
for the management program are (see section 319(b)):
(1) A description of BMPs and measures that will be used to reduce pollutant
loadings resulting from each category and subcategory of nonpoint source
pollution identified in the assessment report-Jthe impact of the practices on
ground water should also be discussed. ^ -,
ฃ ' -...' "V
--">>> \;' -',
(2) A description of the programs that wfll fee-used to achieve implementation of the
BMPs identified in paragraph (l)^These may include^ as appropriate,
nonregulatory or regulatory programs, for enforcement technical assistance,
financial assistance, education, tramng,,;tecttnology transfer, and demonstration
projects. - ,kv -r-x'^V'--.?>
(3) A schedule containing annual milestones for the implementation of the BMPs
and programs identifiediftfOTagraphV(l) and (2).
(4) A certificaftoh b$r,an independent' J^aF counsel that the laws of the tribe
provide, adeqiiafe ,ai*trJ6nty to.imple'ment such a management program, or if
there is aot^deqtia^aiithori^a list of additional authorities that might be
necessary tqjimplemeiit the management program. There should also be a
schedule and a commitment by the tribe to seek such additional authorities as
expeditiously as practicable.
NJ'
(5) A list and descriptions of any sources of federal and other assistance/funding
(other than 319(h)) that will be available for supporting the implementation of
the nonpoint source pollution control measures identified in the tribe's nonpoint
source management program.
(6) Identification of any federal assistance programs and development projects to
be reviewed by the tribe for their effect on water quality or inconsistency with
the tribe's nonpoint source management program.
-------
Model for a Nonpoint Source Management Program
Several basic components and considerations described previously in the nonpoint
source assessment report section should also be included in the nonpoint source
management program (refer to page 5 for a detailed description).-The assessment
report sections that should also be considered for inclusion in the management
program are:
Reference documentation
Cover
Contents
List of tables
List of figures
List of appendices
-------
Nonpoint Source Management Program
The sections that follow provide further explanation and examples of the content of each
section of the management program.
OVERVIEW
The overview states the purpose of the document and explains the need for a
nonpoint source management program for the tribal lands. It also provides a
summary of the major conclusions of the management program. Discuss only
significant information from the management program in this section. Keep the
section conciseideally no more than one page in length.
Examples of information to be included are:
Priority nonpoint source pollution categories to be addressed by the manage-
ment program.
The process used to target impaired waterbodies.
The process used to select BMPs for abating and/or preventing nonpoint
source water pollution.
Public participation used in the development of the management program.
Example (FPAST, 1993b>:
The subtle nature of nonpoint source pollution presents significant difficulties to the entities
charged with its monitoring and managing. Additional problems result from the large
number and variety of agencies, organizations, groups, and individuals involved in manag-
ing land, and protecting resources. On the Fort Peck Reservation, most nonpoint pollution is
caused by agriculture, hydromodification, land disposal, and resource extraction. Construc-
tion and urban nonpoint sources are minor components of the total nonpoint source
pollution on the reservation. Nonpoint source pollution can affect both surface and ground
water.
Fort Peck Reservation's Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan will emphasize
prevention to minimize future rehabilitation needs. The prevention portion of the plan will
rely heavily upon education. In addition to education, the management plan will emphasize
technical assistance and financial incentive for landusers to voluntarily implement BMPs to
prevent or mitigate impairment.
The authority of the Fort Peck Water Code and Fort Peck-Montana Compact will be used to
control significant quantifiable nonpoint source pollution through the issuance of Tribal
water use permits. Education is a major component of the program in order to achieve
voluntary compliance. Range tours, brochures, and videos will be made available to
producers.
INTRODUCTION
The introduction describes the goals and objectives of the nonpoint source manage-
ment program. A typical goal statement might be "to emphasize prevention
whenever possible in order to minimize the need for more costly later cleanup of
tribal waters." An objective should describe how the goal will be met. An objective
might be "to promote available technical assistance and financial assistance for
land users in order to increase voluntary implementation of BMPs to prevent or
mitigate impairment." Another, objective might be "to integrate the nonpoint source
program into the overall environmental program for protection of tribal resources."
-------
Example (CTUIR, 1994):
The goal of the nonpoint source water pollution management program is to protect and
restore water quality, watershed condition, and aquatic/riparian habitat on the Umatilla
Indian Reservation and throughout the Umatilla River Basin. This will provide for the
beneficial use of surface (and indirectly, subsurface) waters within the Basin. From the
perspective of the CTUIR this can administratively be broken into the use for specific
beneficial and traditional uses, and the protection and restoration of treaty-reserved
resources.
(1) Beneficial and traditional uses: Develop program to support 18 beneficial uses (Interim
Water Code) oh the Umatilla Indian Reservation under the administrative and regulatory
control of the CTUIR. The program will support beneficial uses and exercise of treaty
rights throughout the rest of the Umatilla River Basin in accordance with state of
Oregon and federal water laws, codes, and regulations.
(2) Treaty-reserved resources: Throughout the Umatilla River Basin the Tribes retain treaty
rights related to fishing, hunting, pasturing of livestock, and gathering of traditional
plants among other rights. Water quality, riparian and watershed condition must be
managed to provide the opportunity for the Tribes to exercise those rights. Develop
program to provide high quality water as a part of instream, riparian and upland habitat
for fish, wildlife, and plants.
The primary objective of the management program is to protect high quality waters and
improve substandard water quality conditions in the Umatilla River Basin through:
(1) Administration, improvement, and enforcement of water quality standards and federal,
state, local, and tribal laws, codes, and regulations pertaining to land use and water
quality.
(2) Design and installation of on-the-ground projects to assist water quality protection and
restoration and implementation of BMPs where found to support water quality
improvements.
(3) Public involvement and education by various means.
(4) Monitoring of water quality conditions for detection of trends, determination of
beneficial impacts due to projects or implementation of BMPs, location of chronic and
acute sources of nonpoint pollution, and compliance with standards and criteria.
(5) Coordinated efforts in the Umatilla River Basin to ensure a holistic watershed ecosys-
tem approach and reduce redundancy of efforts.
Present a more detailed deSCri
*-' '"
isting'of steps used in identifying nonpoint
f _..'. > f-v^ ^ ,?/ ""*
source problem areas, prion^water&dies^aiid^BMP solutions in this section. This
information shoutid fee;a,,cbfelseJSMjnnjai5ฃpf -the data presented in the assessment
report, but nj&re"ietปled : th&tac^generalip'rocess identified in the overview section.
Example (VTNRDEC, 1988b):
A comparative evaluation procedure was developed and applied to each impaired surface
waterbody. The following four considerations were used to develop the list of "high priority''
waters: severity of the water quality impairment,.... public benefit if use is restored.
Examples of public benefit considered in the procedure were health-related concerns and
recreational activities. Public comments received during workshops were integral to
determining "threatened waters."
-------
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY
This section is intended to provide general information regarding the development of
the management program. The section should identify the legal authority for the
proposed management program and the designated management agency for the
program (e.g., tribal environmental office, tribal nonpoint source task force). Many
tribes establish a tribal environmental office that is responsible for the development
of the program and coordination with other tribal programs, as well as coordination
with federal programs and agencies.
Example (VTNRDEC, 1988b):
The process for identifying BMPs and nonpoint source control programs that will be used
during the management program will also be incorporated into the nonpoint source
assessment process and the waterbody targeting process to gain broader public input. Over
350 individuals and organizations were contacted during the assessment regarding specific
nonpoint sources that they may have observed. Each was asked their opinion of specific
BMPs and programs that they felt were appropriate to resolve local problems. Persons
attending the regional workshops and the statewide meeting on the management program
and targeted waters were also given the opportunity to describe control measures or
programs.
In addition to Task Force and public review of technical standards, BMPs are routinely
evaluated by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. The Agency has continually
evaluated and revised its own rules and policies and urges other federal and state agencies
to do the same with their own standards.
Also, describe the contents of the management program in the management
program, summary. An example of information to include is a definition of how the
program is partitioned (e.g., "The management plan has been divided into two
parts"). Briefly describe the information that will'te,discussed in each subsection of
the plan (e.g., "the administration subsection wJSJ ,
\ "'','*': ' V " -
This section of,the reportshould be organized by the nonpoint source pollution
categories (e.^, agrkaiture^sO.ykuTlture, /construction) that are identified as
priorities iriTthe assessment-report and will be addressed in the management
\ "<ซซ ~y-% *v --.'-;
program. BMPsJdenafied;?ter;,each category should form subsections. Include
milestones for each seteon^saBsection of the plan, presented in tabular form.
-------
Example (FPAST, 1993b ; VTNRDEC, 1988b; EBCI, 1993b cited in USEPA. 1994a):
Agriculture Milestones
Activity Year 1 Yฃar_2 Year 3 Year4
Demonstration - winter X
grazing and feeding
on Wolf Creek
Implement 4 grazing X
BMPs on range units
9 and 10 on Little
Porcupine Creek
Monitor range units X X X
9 and 10 for water
quality changes
Silviculture Milestones
Activity Year 1 ฅfiar_2 Year 3 Year 4
Stabilize abandoned XXX
logging roads
For each nonpoint source pollution category, provide the following:
Provide a brief introductory paragraph describing the nonpoint source, as well
as problems and needs associated with the soujeer Jo the maximum extent
possible, this paragraph should include information'such as the primary
pollutants associated with the nonpoint spjkces.-yJte percent of land use
associated with the nonpoint source ppUutioh category and the percent of
nonpoint pollution on the tribal lands attributed to'the source.
Example (FPAST, 1993b):
Agriculture - Agriculture is Fort Peck Reservation's number one industry and is the prevalent
land use on nearly 98% of the Reservation's land. Agriculture also g'enerates nearly 99% of
the total nonpoint source pollution. The main agricultural pollutants are sediments and
nutrients.
The designated nonpoint source management agencies for Montana have adopted Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) standard conservation practices and specifications
as Montana's recommended agricultural BMPs. The Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes intend to
adopt NRCS recommendations as well. New BMPs addressing pesticide application, fertilizer
management, and streambank stabilization will be added as they are developed.
Appropriate BMPs will be selected on a site specific basis for each agricultural activity
producing nonpoint source pollution. Application of agricultural BMPs for nonpoint source
water pollution control on the Reservation is basically voluntary.
Next, identify specific short-term goals and objectives. These may be subdi-
vided by activities (BMPs) proposed to meet each goal.
-------
Example (EBCI, 1993b cited in USEPA, 1994a; VTNRDEC, 1988b):
Goal - Reduce nutrient contamination of tribal waters.
Activities (BMPs) -
1. Feedlot waste management. The tribe will require that the landowner assess the
impact to the aquatic environment of a hog feedlot on Adams creek. If the impact is of
sufficient magnitude to warrant a waste treatment program, the tribe will consult with
the landowner, NRCS, ASCS, and EPA on appropriate BMPs to correct this situation.
2. Establish an annual awards program to recognize the achievements of farmers who
have implemented BMPs. Supporting text describing the awards program should
follow.
For each activity (BMP), determine the following (if possible) and include
supporting text for each:
- Lead agency(ies)
- Cooperating agency(ies)
- Funding schedule
- Waterbodies potentially to be improved by the activity (BMP)
- Any impacts to ground water supplies
- Implementation schedule and milestones. (These should be presented in
tabular form and cover the four fiscal years following management program
submittal.)
Identify any additional, long-term objectives forthe nonpoint source category.
Examples of long-term objectives are (VTNRDEC, 1988b):
j -. V
- To encourage the use of agricultural BMPs by making cost-sharing programs
more affordable. '*. ' '
~ ' ,x v ' v
- To restore minimum flows and regelate impoundments so as to support
designated uses such as aquatic biota habitat, swimming, and boating.
.*^. "^ ...' '*-.'%- vV
- To reduce septic system faUareS'and groanst and surface-water contamina-
tion and to prolong septic-system performance.,_
EXISTING AUTHORITIES AND PROGRAMS
3 "" % 5 t > \ f
- , ,, - ,. s
N^'jJ., fj- \
This section identifies aM describes anytrifeal or federal laws or programs (in
addition to section 319}sithataddress nonpoint source pollution and activities
associated with eacfi.-Examples of laws or programs that could possibly support
nonpoint source pollutioa control: implementation include:
x V '>"
Clean Water "Act Aiaeiidaients (e.g., sections 303, 314, 404)
** *- -*' // /
Safe Drinking Wlter"Act-Amendments of 1996
^ - .."/
Provisions of the Fooff and Agricultural Trade Act of 1990
Also include a description of specific programs (in addition to section 319) for
financial or technical assistance at the tribal, local, state, or federal level. Examples
of federal financial assistance programs include the Intermodal Surface Transporta-
tion Act of 1991 (transportation enhancements); the State Revolving Fund (SRF) of
the Clean Water Act (special tribal set-aside); the Abandoned Mine Lands Program;
and the Environmental Quality Incentives (EQIP), Wetlands and Conservation
-------
Reserves, and Wildlife Habitat provisions of the 1996 Farm Bill. Examples of state
financial assistance programs are state agricultural cost share programs, state-
funded state revolving funds, and regional geographic initiatives such as the
Chesapeake Bay Program and the Puget Sound Program.
In addition, define the roles of various agencies in these financial or technical
assistance programs.
Example 1 (EBCI, 1993b cited in USEPA, 1994a):
The Bureau of Indian Affairs has responsibilities over all properties held in trust by the U.S.
Government for Indian tribes. The Bureau of Indian Affairs will provide technical assistance
and resources when available.
Example 2 (FPAST, 1993b):
The Extension Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture level provides support for state
Extension organizations by overseeing the distribution of federal funds, by reviewing
programs, and by alerting states about federal priorities and programs. Extension Service
involvement in the national nonpoint source effort focuses on information and education
programs.
This section also identifies any federal assistance programs and development
projects to be reviewed by tribes for their effects on water quality or inconsistency
with the tribe's nonpoint source control program.
Example (EBCI, 1993b cited in USEPA, 1994a):
Consistency of Federal Programs - The Tribal Environmental Office will be responsible for
the review of activities and programs conducted by all federal agencies on tribal lands to
ensure compliance with the tribal nonpoint source program. This will be one of the duties of
the technical assistant in the Tribal Environmental Office. The following is a list of Federal
Agencies expected to be conducting activities that would fall within the guidelines of the
nonpoint source program: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Indian Health Service, and Housing and Urban Development.
This sectiori'pfO'Hdes bibliographic information on sources cited or referred to in the
text of the report. 7; -, \'.":',">, "",, Iy
APPENDICES
Include in the appendices additional information that is important to the understand-
ing of a certain section of the report, but not significant enough to be included in the
body of the text. This material should be supplementary to the information pre-
sented in the body of the text.
-------
Example (EBU 1993b cited in USEPA 1994a; VTNRDEC, 1988b):
Official certification of legal authority to carry out the nonpoint source management
program.
Membership lists for local nonpoint source task forces and member affiliations.
Notes from public meetings on the nonpoint source management program.
ACRONYM LIST
In this section, provide a list of acronyms used throughout the nonpoint source
management program.
Sources
Documents that might provide additional assistance during the preparation of a
nonpoint source pollution management program include:
Section 319(h) Success Stories - USEPA, Office of Water (November 1994)
Geographic Targeting: Selected State Examples - USEPA, Office of Policy and
Program Evaluation (1993)
Selecting Priority Nonpoint Source Projects: You Better Shop Around - USEPA,
Office of Water (1989)
Setting Priorities: The Key to Nonpoini-$9Urce PoSutt&n.ControI - USEPA, Office of
Water Regulations and Standards '{jitiy;i987y? \,--'' * -,
j V ,,..""''' * ^
Integrating Quality Assurance info 'Tribal-Water-Programs^- USEPA, Region 8,
Water Management Division {undated) *.,; < ' -
X ' ' " ', -'"'-&-. ;"'
-------
-------
Section 319(h) Grant Application
Background
After completing the nonpoint source assessment report and nonpoint source man-
agement program, a tribe can develop a grant application in coordination with the
appropriate EPA Region to promote a high-quality, goal-oriented work program
consistent with the national section 319 objectives sand priorities. Within the grant
application, the work plan should describe specific projects the tribe plans to fund for
the coming fiscal year. f-A , <
'
The four general objectives of a sectionJ,t9{JO grant are as,-follows (USEPA, 1994b):
(1) Support state and tribal;;activitt^ with the greatest potential to pro-
duce early, demonstrSbie-water ^quality ,,results.
V-:/?n':':''^- "^7 '"-,-,
\ / f. '%^ '' .. -It. 5 '"-;
(2) Encourage and^rew,ard eWectiy^perfejImance.
(3) Assist in building tneliong-terMfc^pacity of states, tribes, and local
governments' tป address, nonpointjiource pollution problems.
(4) EnccHaage-strong iriteragencyToordination and public involvement.
'' ' "' '* '
-
K* ~ ^ '^
In addition, each;apptoye
-------
Key Concepts
The following is a list of key concepts that have traditionally been important in
319(h) grant applications. EPA regional reviewers look for particular key concepts in
each grant application (USEPA,-1993a) as an indication that states and tribes
understand and support the goals and objectives of section 319.
Emphasize implementation of approved nonpoint source management programs
(e.g., nonregulatory or regulatory programs for activities such as enforcement,
technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology trans-
fer, and demonstration projects that directly result in installation of BMPs or
adoption of management actions directly affecting water quality).
Identify priority actions that will be taken and explain how these actions are
related to the priority problems identified in the nonpoint source assessment
report.
Establish a realistic schedule and milestones for completing the priority actions
identified.
Emphasize pollution prevention mechanisms to control nonpoint sources (e.g.,
restricting erosion-inducing activities in sensitive areas; improved pesticide
storage, handling, mixing, and loading practices to reduce spills).
Emphasize watershed-based approaches to solving nonpoint source pollution.
/:-
Provide for monitoring and evaluation of program effectiveness.
/'
/?*" -**.'*''
Emphasize any interagency coordination witfi federai,>tate, and local agencies
and interest groups. ,. * . ' v~~ * ,
Describe in detail previous acfOmpUshmmtS in addressing nonpoint source
pollution with grant funds (If previous grants were received).
Contents
The following information should ^be included in each nonpoint source grant
application.-. "V * '""'^'"-^"'-'?
~. v "
(1) Cover letter.<
-------
(3)
Demonstrate its capability to carry out the requirements of the grant
program. To meet the capability requirement, a tribe includes in its applica-
tion packet to the appropriate EPA Regional Office a nonpoint source
assessment report, a nonpoint source management program, and a grant
proposal and work plan.
Grant proposal and work plan. This section of the application identifies
priority projects (previously described in the nonpoint source management
plan) for which 319(h) funding is sought. Due to limited resources, tribes
should focus their initial efforts on a limited number of high-priority
surface and ground waters to maximize environmental benefits.
Additional explanation and examples of the content of each section of the grant application
and work plan are provided on the following pages.
-------
Nonpoint Source Grant Application
COVER LETTER
A cover letter must accompany each grant application. The letter states the request
for financial assistance and briefly describes the project that the tribe hopes to
fund.
Example (ฃBCI, 1993 cited in USEPA, 1994a):
Date
Regional Administrator
U.S. EPA
Address
Dear Regional Administrator:
Enclosed are an original and two copies of the (tribe's name] request for financial assis-
tance under section 319 of the Clean Water Act.
The tribe recently submitted to your office a nonpoint source pollution assessment and
management program for consideration. We feel that implementation of this effort is
essential to the protection and enhancement of the waters on the (tribe's name) reserva-
tion.
Specifically, this requested assistance will address (nonpoint source problem) associated
with the (primary cause of the nonpoint source problem). Through the utilization of technical
assistance from the (cooperating agency], the tribe plans to (primary actions).
We look forward to working in partnership with EPA to assess and protect our natural
resources. Please feel free to call me or the Tribal Environmental Specialist if you have any
questions or need more information.
Sincerely,
Tribal Chairperson
Enclosures (number of enclosures)
cc: Regional Nonpoint Source Coordinator
ELIGIBILITY
H- ./"'>'
Federal Recognition x;y
A tribe that has not done so may establish that it has been federally recognized by
simply stating in its grant application that it appears on the list of federally recog-
nized tribes that the Secretary of the Interior publishes periodically in the Federal
Register. This can be accomplished by including as an exhibit a list of federally
recognized tribes with the specific tribe's name highlighted.
-------
Substantial Governmental Duties and Powers
A tribe that has not documented its governmental duties and powers in a previous
grant application can do so by certifying that it has a government carrying out
substantial governmental functions. A tribe will be able to make the required
certification if it is .currently performing governmental functions to promote the
public health, safety, and welfare of its population (e.g., levying taxes, acquiring land
by exercise of the power of eminent domain, exercising police power). Provide a
narrative description, not copies of specific documents, of the form of tribal govern-
ment and the types of essential governmental functions currently performed, and
identify the legal authorities for performing those functions (e.g., tribal constitutions
or codes). Attach the description of duties and powers and label it as an exhibit.
Example (USEPA, undated):
The governing body of the (tribe's name) is its Tribal Council. The Council is comprised of
seven members, one of whom is the Tribal Chairperson. Elections are held once a year with
members holding staggered two-year terms. The Chairperson is also elected for two years.
Tribal Authority
The tribe must submit a statement signed by the Tribal Attorney General or
equivalent official explaining the legal basis for the tribe's regulatory authority over
its water resources or providing evidence of prior approval for "tribal eligibility."
Attach the statement and label it as an exhibit.
Example (USEPA, undated):
Several provisions of the Tribe's Constitution expressly authorize the American Tribal
Council to exercise powers that entail regulation of not only ground water within the
Reservation, but use of all waters originating within the Reservation as well: Article I, Section
6, authorizes the protection, conservation, and regulation of Reservation natural resources;
Section l(b) authorizes the Council to represent the Tribe in transactions and negotiating
agreements with other governments; Section l(c) authorizes the Council to represent the
Tribe in litigation; Section l(d) authorizes the Council to manage all unassigned Reservation
property and control the use of all unassigned Reservation land; Section l(j) authorizes the
protection of the general welfare, health and safety of the Reservation's residents; and
Section l(k) authorizes the Tribe to enact laws on the Reservation consistent with its sover-
eign status.
These specific Constitutional provisions are interpreted broadly to achieve the protection
of tribal rights and interests, and to accommodate constant developments in federal law
that expand or refine the general scope of tribal jurisdiction. In addition, the Tribe is
authorized to exercise any inherent sovereign power not expressly authorized by Con-
gress.
The Tribe's main purpose in regulating the use of Reservation resources generally, and water
use and quality in particular, includes protection of the Tribe's federally reserved water rights
from environmental degradation and unauthorized interference by outside persons or
governments. Tribal authority to regulate these reserved rights necessarily entails the
authority to serve the purpose for which the rights exist, which includes subsistence and
commercial use of the Reservation's water resources. In addition, tribal regulation of this
type fulfills the Council's constitutional obligations to protect the basic health, safety, and
welfare of the Tribe and the Reservation community. Ultimately, such regulation promotes
the political integrity of the American Tribe.
-------
EPA will approve tribal applications for only those land areas where the tribe has
demonstrated jurisdiction. Attach as an exhibit a map of tribal lands for which the
tribe has jurisdiction. In addition, a sample tribal water pollution control ordinance
may be attached as an exhibit to document the tribe's authority over its waters.
Tribal Capability
In most cases, a tribe's approved nonpoint source assessment report and manage-
ment program will serve as adequate documentation that the tribe has "capability"
to carry out the nonpoint source activities proposed for funding. In some instances,
however, EPA may request that the tribe provide a narrative statement or other
documents showing that the tribe is capable of administering the grant for which it
is seeking approval. Even if a tribe does not.have substantial experience adminis-
tering environmental programs,, the tribe will still be considered for a 319 grant as
long as it shows that it has the necessary management, technical, and related skills
or submits a plan describing how it will acquire those skills. In evaluating tribal
capability, EPA will consider:
Previous management experience.
Existing environmental or public health programs administered by the tribe.
Mechanisms in place for carrying out the executive, legislative, and judicial
functions of the tribal government.
. Accounting and procurement systems.
Technical and administrative capabilities of the staff to administer and manage
the program.
Management experience. Examples of general managerial experience include:
/-,. ' /
Operation of domestic water system /: "":-,
Cable TV system /' "/~ \
Solid waste management /', ., vl : '
Administrative offices '-.' ;,,,, ' -
Example (EBCI, 1993b cited in USEPA 1994a):
The Tribe is currently developing a combined utilities ordinance to better regulate Tribal
utilities as well as to provide better services to Tribal members. The Tribe has nearly
completed its own Chemical Emergency Response plan, adhering to SARA Title III
requirements, as well as an improved Tribal Solid Waste Management Plan, with funding
provided by EPA Multi-Media grants. This funding has also allowed the Tribe to hire an
Environmental Specialist as part of their administrative staff, to oversee environmental
programs, such as a water quality program. The Environmental Specialist manages the
resolution of environmental problems on the reservation. The Tribe is also negotiating with
national and international firms regarding economic development of Tribal lands adjacent
to Interstate 40.
Existing programs. Examples of existing environmental or public health
programs administered by the tribe include:
Indian health clinic
EPA Multi-Media Grants - any preceding fiscal year
BIA FY 92-94 Rights Protection - Hazardous Waste Grant
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Native Ameri-
cans -1985 to present
-------
Mechanisms for governmental functions. The following is an example of a
brief but acceptable description of tribal mechanisms for carrying out governmental
functions.
Example (USEPA, undated):.
Executive functions of the tribal government are carried out by the Tribal Chairperson.
Legislative functions are carried out by the six-member Tribal Council.
Accounting and procurement systems. The following example illustrates the
appropriate level of detail for this section.
Example (USEPA, undated):
The Tribe's general accounting system is maintained by ten Tribal accountants and a private
accounting consultant. They handle all Tribal financial activities, including payroll, ledgers,
accounts payable and receivables and program disbursements, in compliance with federal
. accounting regulations. The accountants work with auditors to supply documentation of all
financial transactions. Tribal books are audited yearly by a Certified Public Accountant. In
addition, the Tribe has under contract an accounting firm, who confirm in a letter. Exhibit X,
the breadth and effectiveness of the Tribal accounting system.
The Tribe's procurement system meets the requirements as described in [25 CFR 276.12].
Furthermore, Tribal policy dictates that all purchases and expenditures meet with prior
approval from the Tribal Council.
Technical and administrative capabilities of the staff. An example of the
level of detail expected for this section follows.,/-, .- '";
Example (USEPA, undated):
Existing staff resources include a Grants and Contracts Accountant and an Environmental
Specialist. The Tribe has identified the following as a potential inventory of firms and
organizations that could provide the necessary technical capability for a water quality
assessment/pollution prevention program. We intend to enter into an agreement with one or
more of the following should Section 319 funds become available.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Naval Construction Training Center
A private environmental consulting firm
The University of California at Davis' School of Environmental Engineering
List of Exhibits ,
S, '
Label each exhibit attached to the application, and provide a list of the exhibits.
Retain copies of the exhibits. Check carefully to make sure that all required items
for the eligibility determination have been addressed.
-------
GRANT PROPOSAL AND WORK PLAN
Cover Page
The document cover contains at a minimum the tide of the project and the date
submitted.
Introduction
The introduction states the purpose of the 319 (h) grant application and provides
an overview of the proposed nonpoint source pollution management project. The
purpose must specifically request funding to control a particular nonpoint source
that has been identified as a cause of impairment or threat to the quality of tribal
waters. The overview of the management project identifies the method or technol-
ogy proposed to reduce or prevent the nonpoint source pollution problem. In
addition, the introduction identifies the major components of the nonpoint source
management project.
Example (CTUIR, 1995):
A program is needed to provide high quality water as a part of instream, riparian, and
upland habitat for fish, wildlife, and plants. In the interest of applying a watershed protection
approach and contributing to the improvement of water quality problems related to
nonpoint sources, the CTUIR developed a Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution Management
Program for the Umatilla River Basin. The CTUIR proposes to continue implementing its
management program through:
administration, improvement, and enforcement of water quality standards and
federal, state, local, and tribal laws, codes, and regulations pertaining to land use and
water quality;
design and installation of on-the-ground practices and projects to assist water quality
protection and restoration; implementation of best management practices where
found to support water quality improvements;
public involvement and education by various means;
monitoring of water quality conditions for detection of trends, determination of
beneficial impacts due to projects or implementation of best management practices,
location of chronic and acute sources of nonpoint pollution, and compliance with
standards and criteria; and
coordination of efforts in the Umatilla River Basin to ensure a holistic watershed
ecosystem approach and reduce redundancy of efforts.
Clean Water Act Section 319(h) funds are sought for portions of the Management Program
to be implemented in 1995, (i.e., implementation of on-the-ground projects, project and
educational monitoring, updating water quality databases and CIS information, wellhead,
and other groundwater protection and assessment, and coordination of these efforts with
those other entities in the Umatilla River Basin.
The introduction also;dbotsse^ implementation of the proposed management
project or projects byldentyying the lead organization and cooperating agencies
and defining their proposed roles. The following list identifies potential cooperat-
ing agencies. It is not intended to be all-inclusive (VTNRDEC, 1988b).
Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Corps of Engineers
Federal Highway Administration
Office of Surface Mining
Department of Transportation
Department of Energy
U.S. Forest Service
-------
Example (CTUIR, 1995):
Potential exists for cooperative projects with the Umatilla Basin Watershed Council;
Columbia-Blue Mountain Resource Conservation and Development Council; Umatilla
County Soil and Water Conservation District; USDA-Soil Conservation Service; Oregon
Departments of Agriculture, Water Resources, Environmental Quality, and Rsh and
Wildlife; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; USDI Bureaus of Indian Affairs and
Reclamation; the USDE-Bonneville Power Administration; and the local non-governmental
citizens and groups.
Project Location
Identify the proposed location for implementation of the nonpoint source manage-
ment project(s). In addition, specify the watershed(s) in which the proposed
project(s) are located.
Project Goals and Objectives
Describe thoroughly the goals and objectives of the selected project(s) or
activity (ies).
Example (CTCR, 1995):
Program goal: To improve water quality in impaired watersheds by BMP implementation
projects coupled with water quality monitoring/project performance monitoring.
Program objectives:
1) To maintain the reservation-wide water quality monitoring network and focus on
implementation effectiveness.
2) To implement water quality improvement projects in several impaired watersheds.
% "-' '-' --' H ''jj
Project/Activity Description ,f'< ~- , - , ' <-C"
x, ' '- '- - "*; ,' \ \
^; "\ " ' " ^,-
The project/activity description identifies ifee scope, of the project or activity. It
details the components of& p,roject/activity,aifc& thoroughly describes each
component. Project monitoring and evaluation plans, as well as any public educa-
tion and public participation plans, should be described in this section as well.
x^-A/'H--'. -vvv
f f ^ $ Vf^ 'f ._ v ' ' i ' ' J '
^
-------
Example fCTUIR, 1995):
The on-the-ground projects will continue the focus in the Wildhorse and Middle Umatilla
subwatersheds and will add the Tutuilla/Patawa subwatershed. The projects will include
riparian and meadow tree, shrub and forb plantings, placing instream structures, fencing
riparian corridors, fencing livestock grazing pastures, researching traditional resource uses
and conditions (to be used in developing Desired Future Conditions/project objectives),
monitoring and evaluation of project outputs, maintenance of project developments, and
coordination the projects with local, state, and federal agencies and the public. On-the-
ground projects will be installed only as a part of a watershed protection approach.
It is anticipated that project implementation will result in reduced late summer and increased
winter stream temperatures, reduced sediment delivery, reduced delivery of nutrients and
bacteria, and improved stormwater management. These results will benefit surface and
groundwater quality. Project completion will result in improved management of pastures for
livestock grazing, more efficient forage utilization by livestock, and improved management
of crop agricultural practices. Coincident with these results will be an increase in available
information on water quality in the Umatilla River Basin and in increase in awareness of
water pollution problems and involvement in their solutions.
Outputs/Deliverables
Identify all outputs/deliverables that will be produced by this project/activity (e.g.,
reports, manuals, meetings). The outputs are often divided by respective task in
the proposed work plan.
The following is an example of a list of deliverables (GCPDD, 1995):
Preproject detailed plans that identify the participants in the public/private
partnership, describe where the project/activi^will'be initiated, and provide a
schedule for completion. ^-;ii'~V:r " >
Public outreach plan and materials for educating homeowners and the general
public on the care and maintenance "o^any;sttWpecific^faciMlies which might
be involved. ^~-"x \-'ซ?%f sv
- ,
Quarterly reports detailing the progress of .the project:,
^4^ Vl^:l^>:y''
Final report detailing fte,SQckess 6tjfee^jirbjec^activity in controlling or
preventing nonpolht ^Wce^otlatiori\aad'the cost-effectiveness of any site-
specific svste^.Th%vrepottv^cปntairi,an analysis of all monitoring results.
" '* " f '"
Example 1 (CTCR, 1995):
Task \: Maintain water quality monitoring network and perform effectiveness monitoring.
Output 1: Network monitoring will be ongoing. Data and monitoring reports and monthly
reports from Environmental Trust programs. Quantitative data will be put on data
base.
Task 2: Construct implementation projects.
Output 2: Completed projects for Frosty Meadows, Northstar Creek, Rebecca Lake,
Friedlander Meadows, Rogers Bar, and other projects. Quarterly reports will be
prepared for the projects.
Task 3: Continue watershed planning.
Output 3: Produce operational modules for watershed planning process and select
watershed models for GIS/database. Quarterly reports will be prepared on
progress. (Planning is not a 319 funded activity and will be funded as in-kind.)
-------
Example 2 (CTUIR, 1995):
Task 1: Continue wellhead protection and farm-assist/home-assist programs.
Output 1: Hold public meetings, provide technical assistance, update database. Incorporate
groundwater monitoring data into database.
Task 2: Plan, develop, and implement watershed protection agreements and projects.
Output 2: Development of an Implementation Plan to meet requirements of EPA, incorpo-
rating any monitoring needs in a QA/QC plan for monitoring, developing project
agreements, installing any structural elements of improvement projects,
monitoring, and evaluation.
Task 3: Develop or obtain and provide public information and education on land use
and water quality.
Output 3: Follow through on gaps identified by public in educational/informational
materials/presentations. Propose or develop needed materials/presentations.
Present program updates and other information in two public presentations,
winter and spring 1996.
Milestones
Identify milestones for project implementation (e.g., start date, completion date,
reporting dates). Milestones are listed as a schedule of events with due dates by
which progress can be evaluated. Regions require that general milestones outlined
in the nonpoint source management program be updated and made more specific
for submittal in the work plan. Most Regions also require a form and/or criteria for
evaluating satisfactory progress in developing and implementing 319 programs or
activities (USEPA, 1993c).
, Example 1 (GCPDD, 1995):
Component
Project start
Develop and implement public outreach program
Design site-specific stormwater management systems
Evaluate project through monitoring
Final report
Completion Date
3 months from start
5 months from start
11 months from start
12 months from start
Example 2 (CTCR, 1995):
Component
1. Monitoring (ongoing):
2. Implementation:
Completion Date
Quarterly
10/95
11/95
3. Watershed plans:
12/31/94
12/31/94
12/31/95
12/31/95
Module Completion Document
Models Selected Software
Modeling Reports
6/1/95
9/1/95
10/15/95
Product
Quarterly
Data Report
Project Report
LaFleur Lake Project
Frosty Meadows Project
Gold Lake Project
Northstar Project
-------
Budget
The budget lists the estimated costs for project implementation. Include details
such as staff years and funds, equipment, supplies, construction, contracts, and
indirect costs. The budget must also fully document non-federal matching funds
and other funds (non-matching) for the project. For the matching funds, identify
the matching agency or in-kind contributors and amounts, as well as the staff years
and budget (USEPA, 1995). Tables are an effective way to document the proposed
budget.
example 1 (CTCR, 1995):
Description 319 Funding
Personnel/Fringe $X
Travel/Training $X
Lab Equipment/Facility $X
Monitoring/Implementation $X
Supplies/Materials $X
Utilities/Facilities $X
Indirect Costs $X
TOTAL $X
Tribal In-Kind
$X
$X
$X
$X
$X
$X
$X
$X
Example 2 (GCPDD, 1995):
3J9(h) Funding
Component
Staff (X hours at $X/hour)
Travel
Laboratory fees
Other direct costs
Reproduction
TOTAL 319(h) FUNDING
Matching Funds
Component
Monitoring equipment
Other direct costs
Computer use
Printing/Graphics
TOTAL MATCHING FUNDS
TOTAL FUNDING:
Cosl
$X
$x
$x
$x
$A
COS!
$X
$X
$x
$B
${A+B)
-------
A brief description of the costs outlined in the budget table is often very helpful to
the proposal reviewers.
Example (CTCR, 1995):
Direct Costs:
Personnel
Travel/Training
Monitoring/Implementation
In-Kind Expenses:
Personnel
Lab Equipment Facility
Utilities/Facilities
One field technician for implementation, monitoring
water quality, and tracking and repairing implementation
projects.
Travel directly related to implementation projects,
including on-reservation travel (vehicle expenses) and
possible training associated with implementation
projects.
Costs for labor, materials, and supplies associated with
water quality protection projects, the field monitoring of
those projects, and other nonpoint source monitoring.
Environmental Trust personnel associated with 319
project including hydrologist's time for modeling, water
resource technician's time for water monitoring, and lab
technician's time for water analysis (average cost for all
personnel $X/hour for X hours = $X).
Use of lab building and equipment ($X/month for X
months = $X).
The Environmental Trust will provide office space,
computers, software, phones, fax, and field sampling
equipment ($X/month for X months = $X).
-------
X
-------
List off Contacts
EPA HEADQUARTERS
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
(4503F)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-7105
American Indian Environmental Office
(4104)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 260-7939
REGIONAL CONTACTS
Region 1 (CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT) *'
Nonpoint Source Coordinator {
John F. Kennedy Federal Building,,
One Congress Street x '-
Boston, MA 02203 / 7 ซ ~,
(617)565-4426 /'> "'" <':* ,*"
Tribal Coordinator
John F. Kennedy Fedetal Bail
One Congress Street x. '' '
Boston, MA 02203<^-%:\
(617) 565-3485 \
Region 2 (NJ, NY, PR, VI)
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
Jacob K. Javits Federal Building
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(212) 637-3700
-------
Tribal Coordinator
Jacob K. Javits Federal Building
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(212) 637-3712
Region 3 (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV)
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-3429
Region 4 (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN)
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 562-9345
Tribal Coordinator
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 562-9345
Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI)
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
(312) 886-0209
Tribal Coordinator
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3507 <\: ' -; ..
(312)353-6424 ,-- ' , ':
s N^'j -
Region 6 (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX) V';'-X -^
Nonpoint Source Coordinator',,';v, '- 'r,/; '-
First Interstate Bank Tower at Fountain Mac* K
1445 Ross Avenue, 12th Floor "~xf, '"\S-\l
Suite 1200 _ \ - -'>./; : - "
-------
Tribal Coordinator
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 551-7367
Region 8 (CO, -MT, ND, SD, UT,; WY)-
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 312-6236
Tribal Coordinator
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 312-6343
Region 9 (AZ, CA, HI, NV, AS, GU)
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 744-1990
Tribal Coordinator
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 744-1607
Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, WA)
Nonpoint Source Coordinator
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 553-1601
Tribal Coordinator /
1200 Sixth Avenue >'
Seattle, WA 98101
(206)553-1983 ,":,:, '
V
?, '! -'
\
\ ,
V -
-------
X
-------
CTCR. 1995. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation FY 95 Work Plan. Confed-
erated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Washington.
CTUIR. 1994. Non-point sources of water pollution assessment and management
plan: Umatilla River Basin. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation,
Umatilla, OR. August. j|v
r *" "-
CTUIR. 1995. Confederated Tribes of the UmatsSia Indian Reservation Work Program
for Clean Water Act Section 319 Grants: Prefect level proposal for fiscal year 1995
funding. Confederated Tribes of the UmatJlla.Indian Reservation, Umatilla, OR.
J *-* V' ' S v-, '
EBCI. 1993a. QuaZZa Reservation'section319(h).nonpoint^durce assessment report.
Prepared by Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc. for Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians,
Tribal Environmental Office, Cherokee, NC. July. Cited in USEPA, 1994a.
EBCI. 1993b. QuallaRes^rvaMjv section 329(h} nonpoint source management
program. Prepared %3%li and Wildlife Associates, Inc. for Eastern Band of Chero-
kee Indians, Tribal ฃnvitdmBntal Office^ Cherokee, NC. July. Cited in USEPA,
1994a. , ;' -;.,,:'*:;ป^-. ' -'.; }'
\' ' - "X:: -V'. ->.
FPAST. 1993a, - Po?t Peck'"fribes*nonpoint source assessment plan. Fort Peck
Assiniboine and 'Stoax'Tribes^ Office of Environmental Protection, Popular, MT.
\ ฃ ",
N,- ' : ' '
FPAST. 1993b. Fort P^,Tribes nonpoint source management plan. Fort Peck
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes, Popular, MT.
GCPDD. 1995. Development of an innovative stormwater management control for
urban areas: A 319(h) grant proposal. Guilford County Planning and Development
Department, Guilford County, NC. May.
USEPA. 1987. Nonpoint source guidance. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Water and Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, DC.
December.
-------
USEPA. 1993a. Guidance on the award and management of nonpoint source program
implementation grants under section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act for fiscal year 1994
and future years. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washing-
ton, DC.
USEPA.- 1993b. Guidance-specifying management measures for sources of nonpoint
pollution in coastal waters. EPA 840-B-92-002. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1993c. Working paper on regional nonpoint source guidance and supporting
tables for section 319(h). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
Washington, DC. February.
USEPA. 1994a. A tribal guide to the section 319(h) nonpoint source grant program.
EPA 841-S-94-003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Water; Office of
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds; Assessment and Watershed Protection Division;
Nonpoint Source Control Branch, Washington, DC. September.
USEPA. 1994b. Section 319(h) success stories. EPA 841-S-94-004. U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency; Office of Water; Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds;
Assessment and Watershed Protection Division; Nonpoint Source Control Branch,
Washington, DC. November.
USEPA. 1994c. Policy paper #4: 319(h) nonpoint source funding for Indian tribes.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Denver, CO. July.
USEPA. 1995. FY1996 regional guidance for grants awarded under section 319(h) of
the Clean Water Act. Draft. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Region 4, Atlanta,
GA. January. "' * ' '
3
/?: '',< \ - - \
USEPA. n.d. The financial assistance and program authorization handbook for Indian
tribes water quality planning and managemettprograms ofjhgtfean Water Act. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency^JJekion 9,CSan Francisco, @A!.'
f,^,,,; -.->. \. .!- -
VTNRDEC. 1988a. Vermont nonpomtsourfxt^aiises&mmt report and phase I state clean
water strategy. Vermont -AgeacyvQf NSttซfe|t>R0otipfesf Department of Environmental
i VT. August.
Conservation,
VTNRDEC. 1988Br/Vem|?iit stafe,cJซm 'water strategy (phase I): Nonpoint source
Age'nfey
-------
Know This (title page)
This image represents the harmony of the natural worlda world
that stretches from the Turtle Island to the Eagle Spirit
Peeps (repeating page element)
This image represents the harmony of working together to face the
possible and the unknown.
Sunrise (page 1)
The whirling universe and the waters of creation are greeted by the
rising of the sun. The eagle is a sacred tribal symbol
Warning (page 5)
The two ancient petrogfyph figures represent the time when all
people lived carefully and in balance with the natural creation. They
are helpers from the vast storehouse of ancestor knowledge
maintained by tribal cultures. The turtle is a central figure because
many tribal Americans call North America "the Turtk Island."
Rockwater (page 19)
Based on old petrogfyphs, this image is a story about collecting and
understanding, as well as sharing, the rich experiences of a
responsible community life.
Three Moons (page 29)
This image is a study in cooperation. Three tribal people move
forward, in the same direction, each carrying equal possibilities and
opportunities. They are guided by the eagle, here a symbol of
working for the good of all people and all of the creation.
Fish (page 43)
Mutual dependence is the story of this image. The long trail of the
tribal ancestors and of the animal creation have merged into a
transformational figure. The "open hand" on this image symbolizes
an openness or willingness to work with others. The thunderbolt at
the top of the figure symbolizes the immediate and urgent nature of
pollution dangers.
Wetface (page 47)
The old woman in charge of water is an ancient figure. It honors the
clan mothers of the tribal community as caretakers of the waters.
-------
Program Authorization Information
-------
EPA STATUTES WHICH HAVE BEEN AMENDED SPECIFICALLY TO ALLOW FOR
EPA AUTHORIZATION OF TRIBAL PROGRAMS:
- Safe Drinking Water Act, 1986
- Clean Water Act, 1987
- Clean Air Act, 1990
GAP-FELLING LEGISLATION:
In several instances, EPA has reasoned that even though Congress hasn't specifically
provided for Tribal assumption of certain environmental programs hi legislation, the
Agency has the discretion to allow for Tribal programs. Two Acts where the opportunity
to apply for environmental programs has been extended to Indian Tribes by this method
are:
- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
- Toxic Substance Control Act
OTHER LEGISLATION...
hi addition, three other EPA statutes allow for a limited Tribal role similar to the State's
role. These are:
- Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act
- Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
TREATMENT IN THE SAME MANNER AS A STATE- ELIGIBILITY
REQUIREMENTS:
As required by some statutes, EPA has established a process by which Tribes may
"apply" for eligibility under various programs. The criteria are:
- The Tribe must be federally-recognized.
- The Tribe must have jurisdiction over the territory in question.
- The Tribe must have or be able to exercise substantial governmental powers.
- The Tribe must have the financial, physical and human resource capability to
effectively implement a program.
WHAT IS THE "TAS SIMPLIFICATION RULE"?
Under this rule, EPA eliminated the need to meet all four criteria each tune the Tribe
applies for a program. Once aTribe has been deemed eligible for one EPA program, it
need only establish that it has jurisdiction and capability for each subsequent program.
If the Tribe does not have capability, it must have a plan for acquiring capability over
tune. This is required because each program requires different skills and activities
necessary to provide protection that meets the requirements of the statues and regulations.
-------
Tribal Assessment Report
-------
FORT PECK TRIBES
NON POINT SOURCE
ASSESSMENT PLAN
PIN
Fort Peck
Assiniboine and. Sioux Tribes
Office of Environmental Protection
605 Indian Avenue
P.O. Box. 1027
Poplar, Montana. 59255
(406) 768-5155
-------
FT. PECK TRIBES' NONPOINT SOURCE ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview - 3
1.2 Contents of Indian Tribes Assessment Reports 4
2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
2.1 General Setting 5
2.1.1 Landbase 5
2.1.2 Social and Economic Conditions 6
2.1.3 Reservation Waters 6
2.1.4 Nonpoint Source Programs 6
2.2 Problem Statement 6
2.2.1 Objectives 6
2.2.2 Categories and Subcategories
of Nonpoint Source Pollution 7
2.2.3 Method for conducting
Nonpoint Source Assessment 8
2.3 Goals and Objectives 8.
2.4 Assessment Process . 8
3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 10
3.1 Reporting Format 10
Figure 2 Drainage Map 10
3.2 Reservation Waters Impacted by Nonpoint Sources
3.2.1 Porcupine-Milk River Drainage 13
3.2.2 Little Porcupine-Wolf Creek-
Tule Creek Drainage 15
3.2.3 Poplar River 17
3.2.4 Big Muddy Drainage . 19
3.3 Effects of Nonpoint Source Pollutants
3.3.1 Fecal Coliform Bacteria 21
3.3.2 Nutrients 21
3.3.3 Total Dissolved Solids 21
3.3.4 Sediment 22
3.3.5 Natural 22
3.3.6 Other 22
-------
3.4 Formulation of Best Management Practices 22
3.4.1 Agriculture 23
3.4.2 Construction 23
3.4.3 Urban Run-off 24
3.4.4 Resource Extraction/
Exploration/Development 24
3.4.5 Land Disposal 24
3.4.6 Hydromodification 24
3.4.7 Other 24
4.0 CONCLUSION
4.1 How This Report Will Be Used . 25
4.2 Best Management Practices 25
4.2.1 Agriculture . 25
4.2.2 Hydromodification 26
5.0 APPENDIX
5.1 Tribal Government Resolution
-------
FORT PECK TRIBES
NONPOINT SOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
The Federal Clean Water Act of 1987 established a new
direction for the control of water pollution. Nonpoint source
pollutionpollution from diffuse sourceswas recognized as a
serious impediment to meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act.
The Act status:
"...it is the national policy that programs for the control
nonpoint sources pollution be developed and implemented in an
expeditious so as to enable the goals of this Act to be met
through the control of both point and nonpoint sources of
pollution."
In keeping with this policy, the Clean Water Act was amended
to include a new Section 319 titled Nonpoint Source Management
Programs and Section .518 which allows the administrator to
reserve up to one-third of one percent of appropriations for
sections 319 (j), (h) and (i) for Indian Tribes treated as
States. These sections provide the legal basis for implementing
nonpoint source programs and sets forth certain requirements that
Indian Tribes must meet to qualify for assistance under the Act.
Section 319 includes two items which must be completed by Indian
Tribes in order to be considered for Section 319 and Section
518(f) grants to control nonpoint source problems. These are:
Indian Tribe Assessment Report,
Indian Tribe Management Program.
The Assessment Report is intended to be an analysis of
nonpornT~source water quality problems. The Management Program
jetlTTortn a process for correcting these prpblenis^for the
"Sssiniboihe and Sioux Tribes of tne b'ort Peck Reservation,
Montana, these two items will be produced separately but will be
considered together as the basis for nonpoint source decision
making. The remainder of this report will be devoted to the
nonpoint source assessment. The Management Program will be
produced separately, based in part of the findings of this
assessment report.
-------
1.2 Required Contents of Indian Tribes Assessment Report
Section 319 (a) of the Clean Water Act is very specific in
describing what needs to be included in Assessment Reports:
(a) Indian Tribes Assessment Reports-
(1) Contents -- Each Indian Tribe shall prepare .and submit
to the administrator for approval, a report which --
{A) identifies those navigable waters within the Reservation
which, without additional action to control sources .of
pollution, cannot be reasonably by expected to attain or
maintain applicable water quality standards or the goals and
requirements of this Act:
B) identifies those categories and subcategories of nonpoint
sources or, where appropriate, particular nonpoint sources
which add significant pollution to each portion of the
navigable waters identified under subparagraph (A) in
amounts which contribute to such portions not meeting such
water quality standards or such goals and requirements.
(C) describes the process, including intergovernmental
coordination, for identifying best management practices and
measures to control each category and subcategory of
nonpoint sources and where appropriate particular nonpoint
sources identified under subparagraph (3) and to reduce, to
the maximum extent practicable, the level of pollution
resulting from such category, subcategory or source; and
(D) identifies and describes Indian Tribal, State and local
programs for controlling pollution added from nonpoint
sources to, and approving the quality of, each portion of
the navigable waters, including but not limited to those
programs which are receiving Federal assistance under
sections (h) and (i).The requirements are clear. The report
must identify: waters on the Fort Peck Reservation which
cannot or will not meet water quality standards, are not
supporting beneficial uses, will not support these uses due
to pollution from nonpoint sources; and the types of
activities or specific sources which cause these problems.
The report must also describe the Indian Tribe's process 'for
identifying best management practices and the programs and
sources of funding for controlling nonpoint sources of
pollution. The Tribe will use the State's Water Quality
standards in the reports for assessing impacts to water
quality from nonpoint source pollution.
-------
2.0 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
2.1 General Setting
Fort Peck Reservation is located in northeastern Montana's
glaciated plains and is bound by the Missouri River on the south,
the Milk River and Porcupine Creek to the west, Big Muddy Creek
on the east, and on the north by 48 degrees 38 minutes north
latitude. Most boundary streams headwater in Canada, the
exception being the Missouri which headwaters in southwestern
Montana. Only the streams located within the reservation and the
boundary streams are assessed.
2.1.1 Landbase
Land use on the Ft. Peck Reservation is dominated by
agriculture, specifically cattle grazing and small grain dryland
farming. Table 1 lists the land bases and land uses for the Fort
Peck Reservation. The intensity of land use and its proximity to
water significantly influences the potential for 'nonpoint source
pollution. Irrigated cropland which requires water, fertilizer,
and pesticides has greater potential for surface and groundwater
pollution than does rangeland which has few of these inputs. In
contrast, mining has the potential to release far more toxic
compounds, relative to its land area, than does agriculture.
Table 1: Fort Peck Reservation's land base and use
Land Base (acres):
Trust and Allotted
Fee land
Large water areas
934,759 (45%)
1,158,140 (55%)
419
Total 2,093,318
Indian Land Use: (Trust and Fee acres)
Rangeland
Cropland
Irrigated hayland
Irrigated grainland
Forestland
Low density urban
Rural transportation
Small water areas
1,157,298 (55%)
893,149 (43%)
19,013
4,831
21,300 (0.01%)
3,633 (0.002%)
7,508 (0.008%)
419 (0.0002%)
Total 2,093,318
(Bureau of Indian Affairs Land Status Rei
-------
FIGURE I
FORT PECK INDIAN RESERVATION
CANADA
PHILUPS
COUNTY
i HIGHLAND COUNTY
i
MC CONE COUNTY
1=1
LEGEND
Service Unit Boundary
ซ County Lines
E2Z Reservation
* PHS Indian Health Center
A BIA Agency
O Towns
Q Cities
> 25 Miles
50 Miles
MONTANA LOCATION MAP
-------
I9F, R40E R4 IE R42E
FORT
R43E R44E R45E R46E
PECK RESERVATION
R47E R48E R49E R50E
R53E R54E R
SCALE IN
GEUN I TS , STREA
R5IE R52E R53E R54
R 5 5 E R 5
\
-------
2.1.2 Social and Economic Conditions
The Reservation's population consists of 52% Indian
population and 48% non Indian population. Agriculture is the
primary economic activity for both sectors of the population
whether through production or agricultural land leasing.
However, as with most reservations, unemployment is high and is
currently around 40%. Most Indian farmers and ranchers must
supplement their income through off farm employment. (1990
Census)
2.1.3 Reservation Waters
Fort Peck Reservation is located in the Lower Missouri River
Basin. Seven streams transverse the Reservation in a
northwesterly to southeasterly direction, and all drain into the
Missouri River. For purposes of the assessment, the Tribal
Council has decided to use a stream by stream approach. The
streams are within four major drainages which will be assessed
are the Porcupine-Milk River, Little Porcupine-Wolf Creek-Tule
Creek, Poplar Drainage, and Big Muddy Drainage.
2.1.4 Nonooint Source Programs
Currently, no Tribal programs exist to deal with nonpoint
source pollution problems. The State of Montana does administer
a program for the State, however, match requirements are quite
high which prohibits most tribes from applying. Therefore, the
purpose of this effort is to establish a funded nonpoint source
management program for the Reservation.
2.2 Problem Statement
2.2.1 Qb-iectives
The objective of Section 319 is to improve water quality and
restore impaired uses in waters affected by nonpoint source
pollution. In order to insure consistency among the Indian
Tribes, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has provided
the following definition of nonpoint source pollution.
Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution: NPS pollution is causes by
diffused sources that are not regulated as point sources .and
normally is associated with agricultural, silvicultural and urban
runoff, runoff from construction activities, etc. Such pollution
results in the human-made or human-induced alteration of the
chemical, physical, biological, and radiological integrity of
-------
water. In practical terms, nonpoint source pollution does not
result from a discharge at a specific, single location (such as
single pipe) but generally results from land runoff,
precipitation, atmospheric deposition, or percolation. Pollution
from nonpoint sources occurs when the rate at which pollutant
materials entering waterbodies or groundwater exceeds natural
levels.
2.2.2 Categories and Subcateaories of NonDqint Source
The Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck
Reservation have assembled existing information on water quality
impacts caused by sources of pollution.' The effort was patterned
after the findings compiled and published by Association of State
and Interstate Water Pollution Control Agencies (ASIWPCA) in
1985. Table 2 summarizes the nonpoint source impacts to the
reservation's surface waters by source categories published in
1985 by ASIWPCA.
Careful interpretation of Table 2 is necessary to understand
the relative contributions of each source category to reservation
wide nonpoint source impacts. For example, stream miles of
impacted.streams does not reflect the actual volume of water
impaired due to variations in stream channel morphology, volumes,
and velocity. When total land area devoted to a particular use
is contrasted with the extent of impacted waters on those lands,
the following relative impacts by source category can be more
accurately compared: agricultural 98%; oil and gas 1.5%; land
disposal 0%; hydromodification 0.25%; and communities and septic
systems 0.25%.
Table 2. Summary of Source categories adjoining streams
and/or lakes and reservoirs. *
Source Category
Agriculture
Mining
Land Disposal
Hydromodification
Urban Runoff
Construction
Other
Streams Lakes & Reservoirs
(Miles) (Acres)
640 419
0 0
0 0
10 0
0 0
10 0
10 0
Totals 670 419
(* BIA Land Status Report 1991, and Fort Peck Tribes OEP)
-------
2.2.3 Method for Conducting Nonooint Source Assessment
This assessment draws upon the experience and expertise of
many agencies, individuals and -programs. As a result, many
different levels of information have been used in the preparation
of the report. These sources of information may vary, from
ambient water quality monitoring data to "best professional
judgement", and are identified as such in the text as both
monitored and/or evaluated.
In its guidance for preparing the nonpoint source assessment
report, EPA recognizes this situation and defines two levels of
assessment:
11 : ... two levels of assessment reflecting conclusions based
on ambient monitoring data and conclusions based on other
information. One level is "monitored" waters in which the
assessment is based on current site-specific ambient data.
The other level is "evaluated" waters in which the
assessment is based on information other than current site-
specific ambient data, such as data on sources of pollution,
predictive modeling, fishery surveys, and ambient data which
is older than five years. In the NFS area, best professional
judgement and various evaluation techniques will play an
important role . "
2.3 Goals and Objectives
The goal of this process is to establish a 319 program on
the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Reservation which requires an
assessment and a management plan.
The objective of this assessment is to identify waterbodies
whose uses have been or are likely to be impaired (threatened) by
nonpoint sources of pollution without implementing alternate
management practices. Indian Tribal Government on the Fort Peck
Reservation considers beneficial uses of water as those defined
and which are protected by adopted water law in Montana. These
uses include classifications and water quality standards. If
these standards are exceeded, it is assumed that beneficial uses
are impaired.
2.4 Assessment Process
This report has been produced by assembling data_ฃrQm many
sources of information including IndiafPl'ribal^ovg^iinen.t
and Federal Government reporT5mง5HTindividuals
bout 1ocal_ water quality conditions. Included in
this list is the water quality management r^Ub) plans, water
8
-------
quality assessment 305 (b) reports, Section 106 water quality
reports, Montana NFS Assessment reports, the 1985 Association of
State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators
(ASIWPCA) Nonpoint Source Assessment Report, and additional
supporting records for the Fort Peck Reservation. In addition
the professional judgement of water quality and land management
professionals has also been used.
In 1991, the Fort JPegkJTribes initiated biological sampling
for macroinvertebrates and fisheries using Rapid Bioassessment
Protocols II and V under an EPA approved quality assurance plan.
Fifteen sites across the Reservation are sampled at least once
per year for biological information. In addition, physical
measurements are also taken at this time. Since 1979, the Tribes
have measured the seven major streams quarterly for major cations
and anions, total dissolved solids, metals, pH, and specific
conductivity.
Through intensive biological testing, the Tribes have
developed a reference condition which is specific for the
Reservation ecosystem. This reference condition allows the
Tribes to compare biological information from the 15 sites and
rank sections of streams from unimpaired to severely impaired.
Rapid bioassessment also involves evaluating the riparian
vegetation and surrounding land area which may be impacting the
water quality. The^Tribes are also using a Non Point Source
Reach Assessment torm to evaluate surfounding~talTa~use
~~
which may be impact~~stream water quality. The NFS Stream Reach
Assessment, developed by the state of Tfohtana Water Quality
Bureau, is used to evaluate impacts to a watershed from non point
sources of pollution.
All data is collected according the Fort Peck Tribes Quality
Assurance Project Plan which has been approved by EPA. This QAPP
assures that data collected will adhere to the data quality-
objectives delineated by the Tribes. All biological, physical,
and chemical water quality parameters are discussed in this
document .
Approximately 331 miles of streams were assessed for
impairment from NPS pollution on the Fort Peck Reservation.
Sixteen streams were found to have moderate or severe impairment.
Approximately 30 miles were considered severely impaired and 281
miles were listed as moderately impaired. Evaluative techniques
inrVnrip moni 1-oring, prgrH <-t- -j.ve modeling, fishery SUTV^Vbi, CJfTZen
complaints, professional judgement and ambient data more than
five years oldr "*
Information generated in this manner gives us an idea of the
magnitude of water quality problems caused by nonpoint sources.
This data is entered into the Tribal waterbody tracking system on
-------
an individual stream reach basis, and is updated as data becomes
available. Individual streams and stream reaches can then be
compared and evaluated and priorities set for stream improvement
projects and for the collection of additional monitoring data.
This report will be updated every four years.
For some pollutants, like metals, sediment, and nutrients,
there are no numerical state standards. For those waters with
ambient data, they have been compared wiฃh__a water quality
criteriamatrix (Table 3) to help determine~~whether "Beneficial
uises afe~lmpaired; fChjjL matrix_j.ncludes criteria" values^ f or
for which iLfrpTP xre> no~nrifflgr ii^l ^]^4jjjlarTig^ Where
_
neither numerical standards nor criteria nor water quality djata
exฑsFT~the assessment must be subjective and based on the "*
judgement of water quality management professionals^-
r -- . - - --- ' ' ~
Because the Tribes have not adopted water quality standards
for the Reservation, the Montana Water Quality standards were
qiia^TEv~lmpairmejit . Montana nas
on the Reservation but does not en~ft5rce~-the
standards within the exterior ftoundaZJgS";The Tribes have
reviewed the classifications and generally are in agreement with
the classifications which are mostly C3 and B2 streams, warm
water aquatic life. The Montana Water Quality Criteria Matrix
allowed the Tribes to evaluate chemical and physical data
collected over the past five years for exceedences of Montana's
water quality standards.
3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
3.1 Reporting format
The assessment information is organized by four major
drainages within which there are 17 identified streams or stream
segments on the Fort Peck Reservation. For each basin the
assessment information is presented in tabular fashion. The
tables list the following information: name of stream, miles of
stream, pollutant or cause of impairment^source category,source
supcategsry, specific source (iricnown), proDiem severity and~-
metgog^ot agse"55ineTit^ "Generally, only waterboaies witn motteTate
(M) or severe is; impairment are listed. Only those waterbodies
are listed which have impacts that are predominantly man-caused
and not natural.
10
-------
STREAM BASINS FORT
NDIAN RESERVATION
PORCUPINE-MILK
MAINME
-------
Table 3: STATE OF MONTANA WATER QUALITY CRITERIA MATRIX
(criteria values in mg/L unless otherwise noted.)
Vvlablw
Dissolved Oyygen
Fecal Cclifonas
(1/100 ml)
Nitrite as N
Nitrate as H
Nitrite and Nitrate aa N
Total Alnnonia
Unionized Ammonia
Total Inorganic N***
Total Phosphorus*
Total Diaaolved Solids
Conductance (microtnhoa/cro)
Turb-dity (KTU)
Total Suspended Sediment
Chloride
Sulfnta
Cyanide
Sodium
Sodium Adsorption Ratio
Fluoride
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Chromium VI
Iron
Manganese
Selenium
Mercury
Temperature (C)
Temperature (P)
Copper*
Lead**
Zinc"*
Cadmium**
Chromium III'*
Nickol**
Silver**
pH (minimum)
pH (naximum)
1
7.0
O.OS
2
5.0
O.OS
3
i.o
10.0
10.0
0.5
4
200
0.03
1.00
0.10
10
0.022
0.44
0.021
1.0
0.26
0.004
67.0
.0012
.003
.110
0.003
4.7
1.8
0.004
6.5
B. 5
0.03
1.00
0.10
50
30
0.022
0.44
.0.021
1.0
0.26
0.004
80.0
0.012
.003
.110
0.003
4.7
i.a
0.004
6.5
9.0
500
90
250
250
0.2
2.4
0.05
1.00
O.OS
0.3
O.OS
0.01
0.002
1.0
0.05
5.0
0.01
17.8
0.015
O.OS
6.5
8.5
01.0
1200
6.5
8.5
1000
1800
2.0
4.5
9.0
10.0
100
160
5.0
15.0
0.10
0.75
1.00
20.0
10.0
0.02
S.O
10.0
10.0
0.05
2.0
0.2
5.0
0.5
.01
0.5
0.1
25.0
0.05
" Beneficial Uses: 1 -- cold water aquatic life; 2--warm water aquatic life; 3--public water supplies; 4primary contact recreation; S Irrigation;
6 -- livestock watering.
* Specific criteria for the protection of aquatic life are based on water hardness. Criteria values given arป baaed on water hardness of 100ng/L.
** streancriteria
11
-------
Under "Method," an "M" stands for "Monitored" and an "E"
stands for "Evaluated". (See Section 2.3 Method for Conducting
the Nonpoint Source Assessment.) When information was not known
the appropriate space in the table was left blank.
Biological data is presented in narrative form. Using the
raw macroinvertebrate data, a numerical value is calculated for
each metric. These calculated values are then compared to the
reference condition for each metric. The biological condition
scores for the weighted metrics are summed and compared to the
total biological condition score of the site with the highest
score (reference condition).
A ratio of the study site to the reference site yields a
percentage. This percentage is termed the biological condition
value (BCV). The value provides a final evaluation of the
biological condition or biological condition value. Based on the
BCV, the study site is assigned one of three biological condition
categories: nonimpaired, moderately impaired, and severely
impaired.
Table 4: Rapid Bioassessment Protocol II
Score Category
>79% Non-impaired .
Comparable to the best situation to be expected within an
ecoregion. Balanced trophic structure. Optimum community
structure (composition and dominance) for stream size and habitat
quality.
Score Category
29-72% Moderately impaired
Fewer species due to loss of most intolerant forms. Reduction in
EPT index.
Score Category
< 21% Severely Impaired
Few species present. If high densities of organisms, then
dominated by one or two taxa. Only tolerant organisms present
12
-------
Habitat parameters were evaluated and ratings are assigned values
which are then totaled for each site and compared to the total
possible point value to provide a habitat impairment value. This
percent comparison is used to rank the study site supportability
of biological communities. A mean percent impairment value was
calculated. This mean is then used to designate a final site
supportability or impairment ranking.
Impairment ranking includes: Full support; full support,
but threatened; partial support; and non support. Moderate,
severe, and threatened categories are described below.
Moderate - some interference with designated uses from
nonpoint source pollution, but use is not precluded.
Severe - designated use is precluded because of nonpoint
pollution.
Threatened - currently meets designated uses but data or
assessment information indicate an existing or potential downward
trend in quality that, in the absence of additional management,
will lead to impairment of designated uses within the next five
years.
3.2 Reservation Waters Impacted Bv Nonpoint Sources
3.2.1 PORCUPINE-MILK RIVER DRAINAGE
The Porcupine-Milk River Drainage is located on the west
side of the reservation. The Porcupine is a C-3 classification.
Waters classified C-3 are suitable for bathing, swimming and
recreation, growth and propagation of non-salmpnid fishes and
associated aquatic life, waterfowl and furbearers. The quality
of these waters is naturally marginal for drinking, culinary and
food processing purposes, agriculture and industrial water
supply. The existing land uses are predominantly rangeland,
dryland crop agriculture and limited irrigated lands. The
dryland crop agriculture is characterized by strip fallow
operations and associated saline seeps common to the northern
great plains.
Land ownership is a mix of fee title, allotted, trust and
tribal lands.
Biological Condition Values (BCV) over the past three years
for this drainage range from 23 (severe) to 50 (moderate) . The
habitat impairment values on the Porcupine range from 62 to 88
out of total score of 100. The supportability rating ranges from
partial support to full support over the past three years. Some
sections rated full support but threatened.
13
-------
Table 5: Porcupine - Milk River Drainage
WaterbQdv
Stream UllM
Pollutant or
Cause
Source
Category
Subspedflc
Source
Severity
Method
Porcupine/ 12
Sargent Creek
Total NH3 Agri
B, Fe, Na, P Other
SpCond
Grazing
Streambank erosion
Road
Natural
Mod
Porcupine/
Lower Fork
32
Temp
SpCond
Agri Grazing
other Streambank erosion
Natural
Mod
Porcup:.ne/ 6
Middle Fork cont.
Temp
Agri
Irrigation Mod
Other Grazing
Streambank erosion
Natural
* B-Boron, Fe-Iron, Na-Sodium, P-Phosphorus, SpCond-Specific Conductivity
14
-------
3.2.2 LITTLE PORCUPINE-WOLF CREEK-TULE CREEK DRAINAGE
The Little Porcupine-Wolf Creek-Tule Creek Drainage is
contained within the west-central portion of the reservation.
The Little Porcupine and Tule Creek drainages are a C-3
classification. Waters classified C-3 are suitable for bathing,
swimming and recreation, growth and propagation of non-salmonid
fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl and furbearers.
The quality of these waters is naturally marginal for drinking,
culinary and food processing purposes, agriculture and industrial
water supply.
Wolf Creek drainage is classified as a B-2 stream. A B-2
classified water is suitable for drinking, culinary and food
processing purposes, after conventional treatment; bathing,
swimming and recreation; growth and marginal propagation of
salmonid fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl and
furbearers; and agricultural and industrial water supply. Wolf
creek is one of two salmonid fisheries on the Reservation and is
therefore a high priority water for the Tribes.
s
Biological Condition values for the Little Porcupine and Tule
Creek drainages range from 15 to 58. Little Porcupine has severe
impairment of the biological community while the Tule Creek
drainage is moderately impaired. Habitat impairment values for
Little Porcupine and Tule Creek range from 54 to 87 for 1991-1993
field investigations. Supportability ratings for these two
drainages over the same period range from non support on the
Little Porcupine to full support on Tule. Supportability
increased during the past year due to increased precipitation
across the Reservation.
Wolf Creek's biological condition value for 1991-1993 ranged
from 46 in 1991 to 38 in 1993, which is a moderately impaired
condition category. Habitat impairment values were 73 and 80 in
1991 and 1992 giving the creek a full support but threatened
rating. In 1993, the impairment value was 90, a full support
rating.
The largest urban center on the reservation is located at the
confluence of the drainage and the Missouri River. Other land
uses include dryland,irrigated farming and rangeland.
Predominate use is rangeland. Land ownership is a combination of
fee title, allotted, trust, and tribal lands.
15
-------
Table 6: Little Porcupine - Wolf Creek - Tute Creek Drainage
Waterbodv
Pollutant or
Stream Mites Cause
Source
Category
Subspeclfic
Source
Severity
Little
Porcupine/
Tomato Can
12
B. Cd, Pb, Fe,
Na, P, Mn, pH,
Temp
Agri
Grazing
Other
Mod
Natural
M
Little
Porcupine/
Upper
30
pH, DO, Temp
Agri Grazing
Other Streambank erosion
Natural
Sev
M
Wolf Cr.
14
B, Pb, Mn, Na, Agri
P, Temp, Other
SpCond
Grazing
Streambank erosion
Natural
Mod
M
Tule Cr.
34
NH3-N, Cd, Mn, Agri
Na, P, SpCond Other
Grazing
Natural
Bridge
Mod
*B-Boron, Cd-Cadmium, Pb-Lead, Fe-Iron, Na-Sodium, P-Phosphorus
MN-Manganese, DO-Dissolved Oxygen, SpCond-Specific Conductivity, NH3-N-Ammonia
16
-------
3.2.3 POPLAR DRAINAGE
The Poplar drainage, classified as a B-2 water, is contained
within the east-central portion of the reservation. A B-2
classified water is suitable for drinking, culinary and food
processing purposes, after conventional treatment; bathing,
swimming and recreation; growth and marginal propagation of
salmonid fishes and associated.aquatic life, waterfowl and
furbearers; and agricultural and industrial water supply. The
Poplar River is one of two salmonid fisheries on the Reservation
and is therefore a high priority water for the Tribes.
Biological Condition Values for the Poplar River range from
23 in 1991 to 81 in 1993. Five sites on the Poplar are assessed
for biological condition values. Generally, the Poplar River is
moderately impaired. Habitat impairment values range from 64 to
79, partially supporting to full support threatened status.
A major urban area is located at the mouth of the drainage.
Other land uses include dryland and irrigated farming, and
grazing livestock. Rangeland is predominant.
Land ownership is a mix of fee title, allotted, trust, and
tribal lands.
17
-------
Table 7: Poplar Drainage
Pollutant or
Stream lilies Causa
Source
Category
Subspecific
Source
Severity
UaJhad
Poplar/
West Fork
20
Temp
Agri
Other
Grazing
Natural
M
Poplar/
East Fork
DO, SpCond
Agri
Other
Grazing
Natural
M
Poplar/'
Give Out
Morgan Creek
10
Sediment
Agri Grazing
Construction
Other streambank erosion
Natural
Mod
Roads
M
Poplar/
Long Creek
10
Temp
Sediment
Agri Grazing
Other Dryland Crops
Streambank erosion
Natrual
Mod
M
Poplar/
Lower
58
Fe, Pb, Mn, Agri Grazing
B, NO, NO2, Res. Extrac.
Na, P, pH, Other Petroleum (East Poplar
SpCond Oilfield Unit)
Natural
Mod M
Dryland Crops
* DO - Dissolved Oxygen, SpCond - Specific Conductivity, Fe - Iron, Pb - Lead, Mn - Manganese, B - Boron, NO - Nitrous
Oxide,
NO2 - Nitrite, Na - Sodium, P - Phosphorus
18
-------
3.2.4 BIG MUDDY DRAINAGE
The Big Muddy Drainage is the eastern border of the
reservation. The Big Muddy drainage waters are a C-3
classification. Waters classified C-3 are suitable for bathing,
swimming and recreation, growth and propagation of non-salmonid
fishes and associated aquatic life, waterfowl and furbearers.
The quality of these waters is naturally marginal for drinking,
culinary and food processing purposes, agriculture and industrial
water supply. Land uses include dryland and irrigation farming,
and grazing livestock. Rangeland predominates the area.
Biological Condition Values for Big Muddy and Smoke Creek
range from 12 to 62, severely impaired to moderately impaired.
Big Muddy is severely impaired at two of three monitoring
stations. Smoke Creek is moderately impaired and has the highest
Biological Condition Value. Habitat impairment values range from
52 to 83, with the Big Muddy again scoring lower than Smoke
Creek. The Big Muddy supportability rankings range form non
supporting to full support threatened, while Smoke Creek has a
full support threatened ranking.
19
-------
Table 8: Big Muddy Drainage
Watarbody
Smoke Creek
Big Muddy/
Other
Big Muddy/
Wolf Creek
Big Muddy/
Lake Creek
Pollutant or
Stream Miles Cause
40 NH-N, Fe,
Pb, B, Temp
SpCond
8 SpCond
Temp, pH
Sediment
32 Sediment
pH, Temp,
SpCond,
Other
4 NH3-N, Cd
B, Fe, Mn,
P, Na, pH,
DO, SpCond
Source
Category
Agri
Other
Agri
Hydromod
Land disp
Const
Other
Agri
Hydromod
Const
Agri
Other
Subspecific
Source
Grazing
Dryland Crops
Irrigation
Natural
Grazing
Dryland Crops
Irrigation
Channel i zat ion
Bridge
Wastewater
Natural
Grazing
Roads
Streambank erosion
Channelization
Irrigation
Natural
Grazing
Dryland
Irrigation
Streambank erosion
Severity
Mod
Uejfafid
Mod
Mod
Mod
M
M
M
Natural
* NH3-N-Ammonia-Nitrogen, Fe-Iron, Pb-Lead, B-Boron, SpCond-Specific Conductivity, Cd-Cadmium, Mn-Manganese
20
-------
3.3 Effects of Nonpoint Source Pollutants
3.3.1 Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Fecal coliform bacteria are found in the intestines of warm
blooded animals. Their presence in waters indicates that
pathogenic organisms may also be present. They are most commonly
associated with failing septic tanks and drain fields from
individual sewage disposal systems, agricultural feedlots, and
grazing animals. Grazing units generally follow surfaces water
sources on the Reservation. Most units lack range management
plans and, therefore, provide no protection of water sources from
fecal coliforms.
3.3.2 Nutrients
The nonpoint source nutrients of concern on Fort Peck
Reservation are nitrogen and phosphorus. They originate from
fertilizers, animal and human wastes, urban runoff, and natural
sources. Nutrients may stimulate excessive growth of algae in
rivers or nuisance aquatic weeds in lakes and reservoirs,
rendering water aesthetically unattractive or unsuitable for
recreation. Excess nitrate in drinking water may cause
methemoglobinemia or "blue baby syndrome" in infants. Grazing
and farming practices on the Reservation contribute to increased
nutrient levels. Ground water has been impacted by nitrates,
however, the technological assessment capabilities currently are
unable to verify a nonpoint source connection.
3.3.3 Total Dissolved Solids
Total dissolved solids (salts or salinity) are of concern in
semi-arid areas when water is used consumptively
(evapotranspired). Application of irrigation water to saline
soils leaches salts back to rivers, thereby increasing salinity.
Transpiration by plants and evaporation from open water surfaces
further concentrates salts. In dryland farming areas, saline
seeps have contaminated and diminished the usefulness of ground
and surface water. Excess salts impair water for drinking,
irrigation, livestock watering and other uses. Also, increased
chloride loadings have been documented in the Poplar River as it
flows through the East Poplar Oilfield. Contaminated groundwater
has been linked to these increased loadings.
21
-------
3.3.4 Sediment
Sediment affects more river miles than any other pollutant on
the Fort Peck Reservation. Human activity, including tilling,
irrigation, grazing, construction, urbanization, and forestry
practices, accelerates natural sediment production. Excess
sediment interferes with water treatment, irrigation, fish
spawning and rearing, .and the production of fish food organisms
in streams. Other pollutants, such as nutrients and metals, may
be absorbed on sediment particles and transported by them into
and through aquatic systems.
3.3.5 Natural
In the geological past, Fort Peck Reservation was inundated by
inland seas several times. The resulting high concentrations of
salts continue to be a biological productivity constraint.
Saline seeps and sodic soils tend to be a problem in this semi-
arid region. Another consideration is that the lacustrine soil
deposits have high susceptibility to wind and water erosion. All
of these require special management.
3.3.6 Other
Other toxic chemicals besides metals may cause problems in
Fort Peck Reservation waters and for off-stream water users.
These include arsenic, creosote, pentachlorophenol, and
pesticides. Acids (e.g., sulfuric acid) are often associated
with drainage from abandoned coal. Water temperatures that are
too high for fish and aquatic life are often associated with
streams that are partially dewatered in summer or streams from
which riparian bank vegetation has been removed. Stream bank and
channel alterations and flow alterations (dewatering) also reduce
the amount of habitat available to fish and aquatic life.
Organic compounds, sewage sludge for example, sometimes collect
on stream bottoms and contribute to depletion of dissolved oxygen
in the water.
3.4 Formulation of Best Management Practices
Tribal Council procedure provides public participation and
public comment. A resolution (See Appendix A) authorizes
submittal of the Assessment Plan to other Federal agencies.
Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act requires each tribe to
describe tribal and local programs for controlling pollution from
nonpoint sources. There are numerous programs, administered by a
variety of agencies, which aim to control nonpoint source
pollution. County conservation districts are designated the
nonpoint source management agencies for non-federal lands. The
program is intended -to encourage adoption and implementation of
22
-------
best management practices (BMPs). Technical assistance,
education, demonstration projects, and financial assistance are
used to implement BMPs.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture cost-share programs offer
financial incentives for implementation of BMPs on agricultural
lands on the Fort Peck Reservation. The Corps of Engineers 404
Dredge and Fill Permit Program controls nonpoint source pollution
resulting from hydromodification activities. The Montana
Salinity Control Association, a consortium of conservation
districts in dryland farming areas, provides educational and
technical assistance to implement agricultural management
practices to control saline seep. The Superfund program
administered by the Environmental Protection Agency offers the
potential for correcting nonpoint pollution problems related to
toxic and hazardous waste sites, including some abandoned mine
waste problems.
The Tribal Water Resource Control Commission conducts water-
quality monitoring, assesses and prioritizes nonpoint and point
source problems, develops solutions, and provides management of
these problems. A priority list is kept of stream segments and
lakes that have assessed, man-caused water quality problems. The
list is used to focus and conserve limited management resources.
The following categories and subcategories of nonpoint sources
have been designated by EPA and used in this report. All but
Silviculture, have to some extent caused impairment of Fort Peck
Reservation waters.
3.4.1 Agriculture
Non-irrigated crop production
Irrigated crop production
Specialty crop production (e.g.,truck farming,or orchards)
Pasture land (Grazing)
Feedlots - all types
Aquaculture
Animal holding/management areas
Rangeland (Grazing)
Streambank erosion
3.4.2 Construction
Highway/road/bridge
Land Development
Streambank erosion
23
-------
3.4.3 Urban Runoff
Storm sewers
Combined sewers
Surface runoff
Streambank erosion
3.4.4 Resource Extraction/Exploration/development
Surface mining
Subsurface mining
Petroleum activities
Streambank erosion
3.4.5 Land Disposal (runoff/leachate from permitted areas)
Sludge
Wastewater
Landfills
Industrial land treatment
On-site wastewater systems (septic tanks, etc)
Hazardous waste
3.4.6 Hvdromodification
Channelization
Dredging
Dam construction/operation
Flow regulation/modification
Streambank erosion
Removal of riparian vegetation
Bridge construction
Streambank modification/destabilization
3.4.7 Other
Atmospheric deposition
Waste storage/storage tank leaks
Highway maintenance and runoff
Spills
Natural
24
-------
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
4.1 How This Report Will Be Used
The Assinibpine and Sioux Tribes are working to correct and
prevent nonpoint source problems on the Reservation, but much
needs to be done. Solutions are often complex and difficult to
develop and expensive to implement. Improved landowner
cooperation and agency coordination and additional funding and
technical assistance are needed to correct the priority nonpoint
source problems.
A much more detailed description of nonpoint source control
programs on the Reservation will be included in the Fort Peck
Reservation's nonpoint source management plan, which is also
required under Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act.
4.2. Best Management Practices
Categories, subcategories and specific sources of nonpoint
pollution of Fort Peck Reservation are listed in Table 4 of this
report, Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act requires each
tribe to describe its process for identifying the measures it
will use to control these categories, subcategories and sources.
Four nonpoint source categories are responsible for a
significant fraction of the threatened or impaired waterbodies on
the reservation: agriculture, hydromodification, mining, and
land disposal. Active mining, land disposal, and
hydromodification activities are regulated under various
ordinances administered by the Tribal Council. Best Management
Practices (BMPs) have been developed and are identified in the
Fort Peck Non-point Source Management Plan.
Fort Peck's Section 319 program will emphasize agriculture.
The process for identifying BMPs for this category will consist
of adopting USDA-Soil Conservation Service Field Office Technical
Guide standards.
4.2.1 Agriculture
The BMPs selected from the SCS standards and specification are
currently in use by a majority of the producers on the
reservation (Table 4). Additional BMPs addressing pesticide
application, fertilizer management and streambank stabilization
may need to be added.
One or more BMPs known as a resource management system will be
selected for each land use within a targeted watershed. Proper
application of a resource management system will insure the NPS
25
-------
pollution is minimized. Cooperation agencies will develop new
BMPs if appropriate ones do not exist to solve a specific
problem.
Utilization of agricultural BMPs for nonpoint source water
pollution control on Fort Peck is voluntary. Success in solving
nonpoint source pollution problems has been limited primarily to
smaller streams and projects.
Cost-share programs are available to help pay the cost of.
applying BMPs, but in most cases ranchers and farmers are unable
to provide matching funds. 319 program provides incentives to
help farmers and ranchers implement BMP's. In cases of need,
Tribal sources may be used to augment implementation of BMP's.
4.2.2 Hydromodification
Best Management practices for hydrologic and habitat
modification often relate directly to other categories of
-nonpoint source pollution. For example, grazing practices may
impact stream hydrology by changing seasonal flow patterns and
water yield. Agricultural activities may involve placement of
irrigation diversions in streams. The majority of
hydromodification activities on Fort Peck are regulated under
tribal ordinance and/or Section 404 permits.
26
-------
Table 9: Agricultural Bast Management Practices
Practice Nam* SCS Agrlcultral
Code Subcategory *
Access Road 560 1,2,3
Bedding 310 2,3
Channel vegetation 322 2
Chiseling and subsoiling 324 1,2,3
Clearing and snagging 326 1,2,3,4
Conservation cropping
sequence 328 2,3
Conservation tillage 329 2,3
Contour Fanning 330 2,3
Cover and green manure crop 340 2,3
Critical area planting 342 1,2,3,4
Crop residue use 344 2,3
Dam, floodwater retarding 402 1,2,3,4
Dike 356 1,2,3,4
Diversion 362 1,2,3,4
Emergency tillage 365 2,3
Farmstead and f eedlot
windbreak 380 4
Fencing 382 1,2,3,4
Field windbreak 392 2,3
Filter strip 393 2,3
Floodwater diversion 400 1,2,3,4
Floodway 404 1,2,3,4
Grade stabilization structure 410 1,2,3,4
Grassed waterway 412 2,3
Grasses and legumes in
rotation 411 2,3
Grazing land mechanical
treatment 548 1
Irrigation canal or lateral 320 3
Irrigation field ditch 388 3
Irrigation land leveling 464 3
Irrigation pit or
regulating reservoir 552-A-B 3
Irrigation storage reservoir 436 3
Irrigation system
Trickle 441 3
Sprinkler 442 3
Surface and subsurface 443 3
Irrigation system, tailwater
recovery 447 3
Irrigation water conveyance
ditch and canal lining 428-A-C 3
27
-------
Table 9: Agricultural Bast Management Practices, cent
Practice Name SCS Agricultral
Code Subcategory *
Pipeline 430-AA-II 3
Irrigation water management 449 3
Land smoothing 446 1,2,3,4
Lined waterway or-outlet 463 1,2,3,4
Livestock exclusion 472 1,2,3,4
Mulching 484 2,3,4
Pasture and Hay land mgt. 510 1,2,3
Pasture and hay land plant ing 512 1,2,3
Pipeline 516 1,2,3,4
Planned grazing systems 556 1
Pond 378 1,2
Pond sealing or lining 521-A-E 1,2
Proper grazing use 528 1
Pumped well drain 532 4
Pumping plant for
water control 533 3
Range seeding 550 1
Rock barrier 555 1,2,4
Runoff management system 570 4
Sediment basin 350 1,2,3,4
Soil salinity management 573 2
Soil Moisture mgt. for
saline seep Interim 2
Spring development 574 1,2
Streambank and shoreline-
protection 580 1,2,3,4
Stream channel stabilization 584 1,2,3,4
Stripcropping
Contour 585 2
Field 586 2
Wind ' 589 2
Structure for water control 587 1,2,3,4
Stubble Mulch 588 2
Subsurface drain 606 2,3,4
Subsurface drainage
Field ditch 607 3
Main or lateral 608 3
Tall Wheatgrass Barriers Interim 2
Terrace ' 600 3
Toxic salt reduction 610 2,3
Trough or tank 614 1,4
Underground outlet 620 1,4
Vertical drain 630 2,3
28
-------
Table 9: Agricultural Best Management Practices, cent
Practice Name SCS Agricuttral
Code Subcategory'
Waste, Disposal, on farm
Sanitary landfill Interim 4
Waste Management System 312 4
Waste storage pond 425 4
Waste storage structure 313 4
Waste treatment lagoon 359 4
Water harvesting catchment 636 1
Water and sediment
control basin 638 1,2
Waterspreading 640 1,3
Well 642 1,2,3,4
windbreak renovation 650 2
* Agricultural Subcategorm
1) Rangeland/Grazing
2) Dryland
3) Irrigated
4) Feedlots/Animal Holding
29
-------
RESOLUTION #2245-93-3
TRIBAL GOVERNMENT
WHEREAS, the Fort Peck Tribal Executive Board is the duly elected
body representing the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck
Reservation and is empowered to act on behalf of the Tribes. All
actions shall be adherent to provisions set forth in the 1960
Constitution and By-Laws, and
WHEREAS, the Fort Peck Tribes are developing a Non Point Source
Control program which will serve to protect surface and ground
water from non point sources of pollution, and
WHEREAS, the Non Point Source program is required to compile a
management and assessment plan under the approved work plan and
submit to EPA for review and comment, and
WHEREAS, the Fort Peck Tribes must incorporate the commends into
the documents and approve the documents in final form, Now
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Tribal Executive Board does
hereby authorize the submission of the Proposed Fort Peck Tribes
Assessment and Management Plans to the Environmental Protection
Agency for their comments and to incorporate those comments for the
final Assessment and Management Plans.
CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned Secretary Accountant of the Tribal Executive
Board of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian
Reservation, hereby certify that the Tribal Executive Board is
composed of 12 voting members of whom 10 constituting a quorum
were present at a Special meeting duly called and convened this
8th day of March. 1993. that the foregoing resolution was duly
adopted at such meeting by the affirmative vote of 8 .
Merle Lucas, Secretary/Acct.
APPROVED:
0 Or,
JLJ
Chairman/Vice Chaii-man
Tribal Executive Board
Wyman Babby, Superintendent
Fort Peck Agency
-------
Tribal Management Plan
-------
FORT PECK TRIBES
NONPOINT SOURCE
MANAGEMENT PLAN
PIN
FORT PECK
ASSIN3OINE AND SIOUX TRIBES
605 Indian Avenue
P.O. Box 102T
Poplar. Montana 5925o
F (400)768-5155
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I'.O NON POINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
1.1 Introduction 2
2.0 319 MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.1 Introduction 3
2.2 General Management Program 4
2.2.1 Administration 5
2.2.2 Assessment 5
2.2.3 Monitoring . 5
2.2.4 Education 6
2.2.5 Funding Needs 9
2.3 Management Program for Nonpoint
Pollution Categories 10
2.3.1 Agriculture 10
2.3.2 Groundwater 12
2.3.3 Resource Extraction 13
2.3.4 Hydromodification 14
2.3.5 Land Disposal 15
3.0 EXISTING AUTHORITY AND PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION
3.1 Federal Law 16
3.1.1 Clean Water Act 16
3.1.2 USDI Bureau of Land Management 20
3.1.3 Food Security Act 1985 & Food and
Agricultural Trade Act 1990 20
3.2 Tribal Law 22
3.3 Financial Assistance
3.3.1 Federal 22
3.4 Roles of Agencies/Technical Assistance
3.4.1 Federal 27
3.4.2 State and Local 28
4.0 FORMULATION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 29
4.2 Best Management Practices 31
4.2.1 Agriculture 31
4.2.1 Hydromodification 34
-------
1.0 NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
1.1 I n t roduc t i on
Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act has provided the
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of Fort Peck Reservation with a
uniform framework for correcting and preventing human induced
nonpoint source water quality problems. -Entitled "Management of
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution", Section 319 was added to the
Clean Water Act by passage of the 1987 Water Quality Act (PL100-
4) on February 4, 1987. Section 319 requests that Tribes prepare
two basic documents:
1. A comprehensive reservation-wide Nonpoint Source
Pollution Assessment Report which identifies streams
impacted by nonpoint source pollution;
2. A Nonpoint Pollution Management Plan to address the
problems identified in the Assessment Report.
The NPS assessment report has been completed and submitted.
The report identifies nonpoint source pollutants and sources
impacting Reservation drainages. The assessment report can be
used in determining project priority.
Section 2.2 in the Fort Peck Reservation's Nonpoint Source
Pollution Assessment Report identifies the Reservation's nonpoint
source water quality problems. The Fort Peck Reservation's
Nonpoint Management Plan identifies the reservation's existing
programs and authorities for addressing nonpoint pollution
problems; specifies the general Best Management Practices(BMP's)
to address the Reservation's nonpoint pollution categories;
suggests new initiatives to increase the effectiveness and
improve coordination of nonpoint control efforts; proposes
specific watershed demonstration projects for individual streams;
and identifies estimated costs and sources of funding to support
implementation of BMPs and nonpoint control measures.
Section 319 requires six principal categories of information
to be included in the Reservation's Nonpoint Source (NPS)
Management Plans (Nonpoint Source Guidance, December 1987, U.S.
EPA, Washington B.C.): Each of these categories is addressed in
the Fort Peck Reservation's Nonpoint Source Pollution Management
Plan.
1. Best Management Practices which will be used to reduce
pollution from each category or subcategory of NPS pollution,
taking into account the impact of the proposed practice on
groundwater quality.
-------
2. Nonpoint Source Programs including regulatory and
nonregulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance,
financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer,
demonstration projects, and monitoring/evaluation to assist in
the implementation of BMPs, The lead and cooperating agencies
for carrying out these programs and their specific
responsibilities should be clearly identified.
3. A schedule containing annual milestones for the four
year plan which can be used to gauge the effectiveness of various
programs. The schedule shall provide for utilization of BMPs at
the earliest practicable date.
4. A certification of adequacy of Tribal Ordinances by the
Tribal Attorney that existing laws and ordinances provide
adequate authority to implement the proposed management program.
If additional legal authority is needed, a schedule for seeking
such authority shall be adequately expeditious to allow
implementation within the four year Management Program.
5. Funding sources which are available to carry the Tribes
program in each of the four fiscal years, in addition to
assistance provided under section 319.
6. Federal consistency - The Fort Peck Reservation
Management Program should identify federal financial assistance
programs and federal development projects which will be reviewed
by the State for their consistency with the proposed NPS
Management Plan.
2.0 319 MANAGEMENT PLAN
2.1 Introduction
The basic characteristics of nonpoint source pollution (i.e.
pollution is diffuse, discharges occur by dispersed pathways,
discharge is generally associated with precipitation and runoff,
and discharge is related to man's use of land) make it difficult
to monitor and quantify impacts of nonpoint source pollution.
Impacts from nonpoint pollution episodes are often individually
insignificant, but collectively and cumulatively significant.
Deterioration in watersheds may occur slowly. In many instances,
impacts of nonpoint pollution sources are subtle and gradual,
making it" difficult to demonstrate impairment to beneficial uses.
When more than one nonpoint source is involved, determining the
proportion of the problem attributable to individual sources can
be difficult.
The nondramatic nature of nonpoint source pollution,
particularly sedimentation explains why control efforts have
lagged. The subtle nature of nonpoint source pollution presents
significant difficulties to the entities charged with its
-------
monitoring and managing. Additional problems result from the
large number and variety of agencies, organizations, groups and
individuals involved in managing land, and protecting resources.
On the Fort Peck Reservation, most nonpoint pollution is caused
by agriculture, hydromodification, land disposal, and resource
extraction. Construction and urban NFS sources are minor
components of the total NFS pollution on the reservation. NFS
pollution sources are minor components of the total NFS pollution
on the reservation. NFS pollution can affect both surface and
groundwater.
Fort Peck Reservation's NFS Pollution Management Plan will
emphasize prevention to minimize future rehabilitation needs.
The prevention portion of the plan will rely heavily upon
education. In addition to education, the Management Plan will
emphasize technical assistance and financial incentive for
landusers to voluntarily implement BMPs to prevent or mitigate
impairment. BMP's are identified and listed in the Assessment
Report on pages 15-17 Table 4.
BMP's are methods, measures, procedures, or practices used
to control or reduce nonpoint source pollution. BMP's can be
structural controls or nonstructural controls; they can be
operation or maintenance procedures; they can be applied before,
during or after pollution producing activities.
The authority of the Fort Peck Water Code and Fort Peck-
Montana Compact will be used to control significant quantifiable
nonpoint source pollution through the issuance of Tribal water
use permits.
Education is a major component of the program in order to
achieve voluntary compliance. Range tours, brochures, and videos
will be made available to producers.
2.2 General Management Program
The Fort Peck Office of Environmental Protection (OEP)
with concurrence from the Fort Peck Tribal Executive Board
through resolution is responsible for administering Fort Peck
Reservation's Water Quality laws and delegated federal water
pollution control programs. For adminstrative purposes, the OEP
reports to the Land Committee for all business regarding water
and land resource issues. The Land Committee, a subcommittee of
the full Tribal Executive Board, makes preliminary determinations
on issues and refers them to the full board for voting.
For the Nonpoint Source program, a NPS task force will be
set up consisting of water users and managers which will make
recommendation to the Land Committee for funding and approval
with full approval from the Tribal Executive Board. The Task
Force will meet annually to review project proposals and make
-------
recommendations to the Board.
The NPS Management Plan has been divided into two parts:
l)the General Management Program, and 2)Specific Management
Programs for each NPS pollution category. The General Management
Program includes administration, assessment, monitoring, and
general education. The Specific Management Programs for
agriculture, hydromodification, land disposal, and resource
extraction identify BMPs, prioritize impaired streams, and
propose demonstration projects to implement BMPS. Milestones
have been established for the overall General Management Program.
Milestones describe project accomplishments which should be
achieved by specified target date. Milestones often summarize
several activities. Implementation of most milestones will be
dependent upon the availability of 319 and other funds.
2.2.1 Administration - Administration includes coordinating
the overall General Management Program; the Specific Management
Programs for agriculture, hydromodification, land disposal, and
resource extraction; providing interagency coordination;
periodically updating the overall plan; and obtaining the
necessary funding for programs. OEP personnel will be
responsible for these activities, assisted by the NPS task force
and Tribal Executive Board.
2.2.2 Assessment - Knowledge of nonpoint source pollution
problems on the Fort Peck Reservation is a combination of
evaluation studies and professional judgement. Much of the
information was gathered in earlier efforts by the 208 program,
the 106 program, and other specific studies. The Fort Peck
Reservation is using an assessment form to evaluate stream
segments. This form is compatible with the EPA "Water Body
Tracking System." The information obtained is amenable to
computer input and retrieval for easy evaluation and updating.
The assessment will be updated every four years.
2.2.3 Monitoring - In addition to updating NPS stream
evaluations, the Fort Peck Reservation has expanded chemical and
biological monitoring to better characterize water quality,
quantify impairments, identify trends. Additional evaluation
efforts will be employed to evaluate the success of BMP
implementation/demonstration projects.
The General Management Program milestones for administration,
assessment, and monitoring are as follows:
GENERAL PROGRAM MILESTONES**
ACTIVITY OUTPUT END YEAR
ADMINISTRATION
Submit final NPS
-------
Management Plan and Assessment
plans to EPA 2 11/30/94
Request 319 Grant from EPA
for implementation of
Management Plan 1 10/1/94
Update Management Plan, as needed,
and review with NPS task force
and Tribal Exective Board VAR ONGOING
Submit annual report to EPA 1 11/1
Submit Quartery Progress Reports 4/year Quarterly
Appoint Task and Force and
convene to review
program plans and milestones 1 meeting 1/15/95
Convene Task Force to review
projects and program and set
priorities for next fiscal year 1 meeting 6/30/94
Incorporate priorities into
workplan for Tribes' NPS
program and submit to funding
agencies(Tribes, EPA,State,
USGS,BIA) 1 Workplan/Grant ONGOING
1st year 9/30/95
Annually
**Education and Category milestones are listed separately
2.2.4 Education - Because so much of this program rests upon
voluntary cooperation by farmers and ranchers, an active
information and education program is critical. The more people
who know and understand about the causes, effects and solution to
nonpoint pollution, the less likely they are to be part of the
problem, and the more likely they are to become part of the
solution. Therefore, an education program is designed to promote
voluntary corrective action by producers, Tribal Council members,
and other allottees and their heirs to prevent or reduce future
problems by increasing general public awareness.
An education program for the Fort Peck Reservation will
include a variety of items targeted specifically for Native
American farmers and ranchers on the Fort Peck Indian
Reservation. Pamphlets and brochures will be developed and sent
with the mailings of the range unit permits. The Bureau of
Indian Affairs will also have access to these materials for
Distribution to new permittees,
-------
Range tours of .demonstration sites will be conducted by the
Office of Environmental Protection and County Conservation
Districts for the Fort Peck Indian Farmers and Ranchers
organization and other interested farmers and ranchers. Riparian
education will be the primary focus of these range tours.
A slide presentation is also being developed for presenting
to Fort Peck Indian Farmer and. Rancher meetings and the Land
Committee of the Fort Peck Tribal Executive Board as well as
other land use agencies who may want to know the scope of the NPS
program on the Reservation.
The Fort Peck Tribes will be actively participating in the
Grazing Lands Initiative for the state of Montana. Local
workshops at sites on the Reservation will be requested by the
Fort Peck Tribes. Emphasis on water quality and the improvement
of water quality as well as monitoring are part of the local
workshops' agenda.
To promote riparian area protection and reduce
agriculturally related NPS pollution, a Riparian Education
Committee was established in May 1988. The Committee spearheaded
by DNRC/CDD and comprising agriculture and landowner
organizations, has pursued a number of educational activities.
These include compilation of riparian management information,
identification of riparian areas packet, demonstration areas,
development of a riparian management information booth and
presentations, and conducting education field tours for private
landowners, agriculture organizations, conservation districts,
and others. The Tribes' NPS program will use these materials and
educational methods extensively.
A number of complimentary NPS related education programs are
currently in progress. The Cooperative Extension Service
completed a three year groundwater protection, and education
program. This education effort targeted groundwater pollution
originating from agriculture and its impact on all user groups.
The Montana Salinity Control Association works directly with
landowners to reverse saline seep on private agricultural lands.
The problem continues to grow on the Fort Peck Reservation.
Education materials which focus on the prevention of saline seep
and identifies lands impacted by saline seep is needed and will
be initiated of 319 funding becomes available.
The Fort Peck Reservation proposes a reservation-wide
education program to address nonpoint source pollution as a
whole. The program will be directed at landowners, land
managers, industry, other users, and students.
The milestones for the education program are described
below.
-------
Education Milestones
ACTIVITY OUTPUT DATE
AGRICULTURE
Develop Riparian Demonstration
Site on the West Fork of the
Poplar River for Water Quality
impacts from grazing. 1 DEM. SITE 1/92-9/93
Develop brochure and display
with cooperation from SCS 1 Broch/1 Disp. 3/94
Display and brochure mailouts,
presentations at fairs,
ag expositions, and ag
organization meetings VAR ONGOING
Implement Winter grazing/winter feeding
demonstration site on Wolf Creek
as part of stream wide project 1 6/95
Range tours of demonstration sites,
different conservation practices
which protect water quality. 3/Yr. 5/93-12/98
Update displays with monitoring
information as needed VAR ONGOING
GROUNDWATER
Participate in Project WET and
demonstrate WET's groundwater
model in schools and science
fairs across reservation VAR ONGOING
Coordinate Safe Drinking
Water Week activites with
Reservation Grade Schools VAR April/Ongoing
Publish articles on protecting
ground water from contamination
in Wotanin(Reservation Newspaper) 3/Yr. ONGOING
Distribute education materials
on nitrate contamination and sources
to Reservation residents and those
wells on the Reservation with
high nitrate levels. 1/Yr. 6/96
Work with Eastern Plains
RC&D on Abandoned Well
demonstration . 1 6/95
-------
RESOURCE EXTRACTION
Publish article on results
of USGS study on brine
contamination and the effects 1 7/95
HYDROMODIFICATION
Draft a fact sheet on permitting
proceedures for channel alteration
on the Reservation 1 10/96
LAND DISPOSAL
Publish articles on used
oil disposal ' 2/yr ONGOING
Present information to grade
schools during Earth Day presentations
on garbage costs and pollution
control measures at landfill
sites 1/yr. ' April/annually
2.2.5 Funding Needs
Annual anticipated funding needs for the general management
programs are as follows:
A. Administration
One Third-time Staff member $14,000
B. Monitoring Program (See Also; Assessment Report)
Full time staff member (3/4 OEP, 1/4 SCS) $10,000
Travel Per Diem $ 2,000
Equipment/Lab support $ 3,500
C. Education
The following budget describes the financial support
required to fulfill the education milestones, a 3/4 time staff
person would coordinate and implement the general education
programs, and assist with monitoring efforts at demonstration
sites and potential sites.
1. General Education $16,000
Half time staff person
(1/4 SCS, 1/4 OEP)
-------
Materials $ 1,000
pamphlets
videos
education booth materials
curriculum material development and printing
monitoring education
2. Herbicide/Pesticide Education (See Agriculture Section)
Development and distribution of education materials
$1,000
TOTAL $49,500
2.3 Management Program for Nonooint Pollution Categories
Fort Peck has identified BMPs, developed and education
program, and selected an agricultural watershed demonstration
project. The Fort Peck Reservation's Assessment Report lists
impaired water bodies. Management decisions and BMP's
implemented are based upon site locality.
The following consideration will be used in selecting a
project:
1. Severity of pollution problem/extent of impairment of
beneficial uses;
2.Potential for effectively addressing the pollution
problem, given technical and financial constraints (i.e.
optimizing economic benefits);
3.Public participation/landowner cooperativeness.
Proposed projects will be reviewed and evaluated. The
Conservation District, as the state of Montana designated water
quality management agency, may serve as project sponsors. There
may be instances where other organizations may serve as project
sponsors.
Milestones and BMPs for. hydromodification, land disposal,
and construction activities are not delineated because they are
addressed by existing state and federal regulatory programs.
These regulatory programs stipulate the formulation and
application of BMPs. Efforts will continue to evaluate and
improve the effectiveness of these programs. Section 3 presents
a listing of regulatory programs and sources of financial and
technical assistance available to help implement BMPs for each
category.
2.3.1 Agriculture
Agriculture is Fort Peck Reservation's number one industry
10
-------
and is the prevalent land use on nearly 98% of the Reservation's
land. Agriculture also generates nearly 99% of the total
nonpoint source pollution. The main agricultural pollutants are
sediments and nutrients.
The designated NFS management agencies for Montana have
adopted Soil Conservation Service standard conservation practices
and specifications as Montana's recommended agricultural BMPs.
The Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes intend to adopt SCS
recommendations as well. These BMPs are listed in the Assessment
Report pages 15-17, Table 4. Detailed descriptions of these
practices are available at local SCS offices. New BMPs
addressing pesticide application, fertilizer management and
streambank stabilization will be added as they are developed.
Appropriate BMPs will be selected on a site specific basis
for each agricultural activity producing nonpoint source
pollution. Application of agricultural BMPs for nonpoint source
water pollution control on the Reservation is basically
voluntary.
However, if agricultural practices cause pollution of
reservation waters, those practices can be regulated under the
Clean Water Act or by a new Tribal ordinance setting and
enactment. The Conservation Districts, Soil Conservation
Service, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service,
Extension Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs provide the
primary assistance and encouragement for implementation of these
agricultural BMPs.
Agricultural Milestones
ACTIVITY OUTPUT DATE
Complete Winter Grazing/
Winter Feeding Demonstration
on Wolf Creek 1 Demo 6/95
Monitor Water Quality
for three years at site VAR 10/99
Complete Annual Reports . 1/yr. 11/15
Complete additional
BMPs on Wolf Creek Drainage
by identifying cooperators
applicable BMPs and funding
sources 3(max) 10/1/97
Implement Grazing BMPs
on Range units 9&.10 on
Little Porcupine Creek
11
-------
Drainage 4 BMPS 10/1/96
Monitor Range Units 9&10
for water quality changes VAR 1996-1999
Continue Monitoring West Fork
Poplar River with the STate
of Montana and SCS for next
8 years VAR 2002
2.3.2 Groundwater
Groundwater across the reservation has been assessed in
detail by the USGS through a Joint Funding Agreement between the
Tribes' Water Resources Office and the USGS. Five major aquifers
and their water quality were delineated for the entire
reservation. This study entitled "Reconnaissance of Ground-Water
Resources of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Northeastern
Montana", also detected ground-water contamination in two
aquifers. The Flaxville aquifer had high nitrate values while
the alluvial aquifer in the Poplar River Valley had high total
dissolved solids and chloride values.
From the reconnaisance study, the Tribes' Water Resources
Office entered into another Joint Funding Agreement with USGS to
study the source and extent of the contamination in the alluvial
aquifer in the Poplar River Valley. This study delineated the
extent and magnitude of the brine contamination from oil and gas
activites in the East Poplar Unit Oilfield. The final report is
going through internal review at USGS.
In 1994, the Fort Peck Tribes were awarded a 319 grant from
the State of Montana to study the source and extent of the
nitrate contamination in the Flaxville aquifer on the
Reservation. The USGS, Bureau of Indian Affairs, the
Conservation District, and the Montana Extension Service are all
cooperators on this project. Once the study is completed, the
Tribes plan to use the results and design an abatement process
through the Tribes' 319 Management Plan.
Due to the high cost of groundwater investigations, the
Tribes will pursue other sources of funding for the initial
assessments. The Indian set aside for the 319 program is not
sufficient enough to develop a broad scale ground water program.
However, abatement may be done if it involves education and
demonstrations; other abatements processes such as pumping and
creating are out of the question.
The ground water program will focus on researching
strategies to present further degradation of the ground water
resource from mineral extraction and nitrate contamination.
12
-------
Demonstration projects may be implemented providing they are cost
effective. The Tribes intends to work closely with the Soil
Conservation Service, the oil industry, and the Department of
Natural Resources and Conservation on these projects.
Ground Water Milestones
ACTIVITY OUTPUT DATE
Examine Abatement options for
Brine Contamination VAR 12/95
Implement.Abatement options using
existing resources of the Tribes
and the BIA VAR 3/96
Delineate Abatement plan
for Nitrate contamination
study VAR 10/96
Develop funding options and
apply for funding for abatement
plan 1 11/96
Implement Abatement plan
for Nitrate contamination VAR 1/97/ongoing
2.3.3 Resource Extraction
The mining industry is well regulated on the Reservation.
Existing Tribal ordinances require financial restitution and
operating stipulations for minerals extraction.
Tribal resource staff will evaluate and review the
effectiveness of existing programs to control nonpoint source
pollution from petroleum extraction activities. Recommendations
for improvements to existing programs, if necessary will be
included in these annual evaluations.
Mandatory regulations, stipulating BMPs, operating
procedures and specifications have encouraged the mining industry
to operate .in a responsible manner while attempting to protect
water quality. Since early 1970, regulations requiring water
quality protection and reclamation have reduced the impacts on
mineral extraction. NFS pollution caused by past mining will
largely be addressed by the Abandoned Mine Lands (AML)
Reclamation program. The AML will focus first on coal mines.
13
-------
Resource Extraction Milestones
ACTIVITY OUTPUT DATE
Review existing suface
requirements for petroleum
extraction industry var 3/96
Assume primacy for UIC program
from EPA 1 9/95
Recommend improvements to
existing program at NFS
task force meeting VAR 6/95
2.3.4 Hvdromodification
This nonpoint source category includes streambank/stream
channel alterations and construction activities, flow
regulation/modification, and construction and operation of dams.
As described in Chapter 3, Assiniboine and Sioux's Comprehensive
Code of Justices has several existing ordinances that address
nonpoint pollution from hydromodification activities. These
existing programs provide a mechanism for managing nonpoint
source pollution control activities.
Tribal staff will evaluate and review the effectiveness of
these existing programs to control nonpoint source pollution from
hydromodification activities. Recommendations for improvements
to existing programs, will be included in the annual evaluation.
BMPs for hydromodification often relate directly to other
categories of nonpoint source pollution. For example, grazing
practices in riparian zones may impact stream hydrology by
changing seasonal flow patterns and water yield. Agricultural
activities may involve streambank/channel alterations. BMPs
adopted under the Management Programs for these other categories
will also control pollution from hydromodification activities.
Hydromodification Milestones
ACTIVITY \ OUTPUT DATE
Review Conservation District
permits, EPA permits, State of
Montana permits for applicability
to tribal lands VAR 9/95
Review with Task Force 1 6/96
Incorporate and/or adopt
oermits for modification
activities VAR 1/96
14
-------
2.3.5 Land Disposal
This nonpoint source category includes pollution related to
solid waste and sludge disposal, on-site wastewater treatment,
and runoff/leachate from land treatment or hazardous waste
disposal sites.
Since 1994, RCRA Subtitle D regulations for landfills
require operators to implement run on/run off control measures
including leachate collection systems. Additionally, ground
water monitoring is also required at landfill sites. Since April
of 1994, the Fort Peck Reservation has only one landfill
operating. All other open dumps and landfills were closed
because they could meet the requirements of Subtitle D. These
dumps and landfills were covered in compliance with closure
regulations and have been reseeded to grass. Potential of
pollution from runoff from these sites is minimal.
The Tribes have not implemented a Subtitle D program on the
reservation. The one landfill on the reservation is run by the
City of Wolf Point and is licensed by the State of Montana.
Although the Tribes have plans to develop a Subtitle D program,
primacy may pose a problem as well as funding to develop the
program.
Improper disposal of used oil poses the most difficult
problem. Sites that will accept used oil are limited and must be
monitored to ensure that strickly used oil is deposited.
Education on the effects of used oil on the environment will be
one of milestones for the non point source program.
Tribal staff will evaluate and review the effectiveness of
these existing programs to control nonpoint source pollution from
land disposal activities. Recommendations for improvements to
existing programs, will be included in the annual evaluation.
Review existing land disposal
regulations for effectiveness VAR 3/96
Review runon/runoff control
measures for landfills on
the reservation VAR /96
Evaluate regs with
Task Force I 6/96
15
-------
Land Disposal Milestones cont'd
ACTIVITY OUTPUT DATE
Modify codes as needed or
develop primacy program for
land disposal practices
under Subtitle D VAR 7/96
3.0 EXISTING AUTHORITIES AND PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION
3.1 Federal Laws
3.1.1 Federal Clean Water Act
In 1972, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments (PL 92-500) . The Clean Water Act (CWA) provided a
comprehensive national framework for water pollution control and
water quality management for the United States. The goal of the
Act was to restore and maintain the. integrity of our nations
waters, and to provide water quality sufficient for "the
protection and propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife, and
provision of recreation in and on the water." The Act was
amended again in 1977, 1981, 1987 and is likely to be renewed in
1995.
Amendments to the CWA added in 1981 provided for
reservations to receive grants to carry out water quality
management planning activities. This allowed the Tribes to
receive federal funding to help carry out basic water quality
management planning activities with 208 funds.
Activities conducted by the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes in
accordance with 208 were:
1. A full assessment of water quality including physical,
chemical, and biological properties of the seven major streams on
the Reservation;
2. A complete listing of existing beneficial uses and beneficial
uses attainable based on existing water quality;
3. A set of water quality standards which would protect these
beneficial uses;
4. A quality assurance plan.
The statewide 208 Water Quality Management Plan established
the basic framework for addressing nonpoint source pollution
problems. This framework consists of designations of the U.S.
Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as
the management agencies for nonpoint source pollution control on
16
-------
federal lands; and designations of the county soil conservation
districts as the lead management agencies for nonpoint source
pollution control on non-federal land. " The Assiniboine and Sioux
Tribes have developed a Memorandum of Understanding with Soil
Conservation Service for nonpoint source pollution control
program. This basic framework for water quality management and
nonpoint source pollution control, which was developed under the
208 program, remains in place today.
In addition, the Tribes have received Section 106, Water
Quality Assessment and Management grants for the past five years.
These grants have been used to develop baseline biological
condition information in order to develop a framework to assess
the degree of impairment on reservation streams from non point
source pollution.
Section 303 Section 303 of the CWA requires that EPA review
and approve water quality standards to assure the WQS are
consistent with the requirements of the CWA. Water quality
standards are provisions of local, state, or federal law which
consists of a designated use or uses for the waters of the United
States, and water quality criteria to maintain and protect such
uses. Water quality standards must protect public health or
welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of
the CWA. Accordingly, WQS influence and affect all water
pollution control programs.
EPA guidance indicates that the relationship between
nonpoint source pollution control and water quality standards
should be based upon three basic principles:
1. BMPs must be designed to meet water quality standards.
It is recognized that BMPs are the primary mechanism to enable
the achievement of WQS. It is intended that proper installation
of tribal approved BMPs will achieve WQS. For proposed nonpoint
source activities, BMPs designed and implemented in accordance
with a tribal approved process will normally constitute
compliance with the CWA. Once BMPs have been approved by the
Tribes, the BMPs become the primary mechanism for meeting WQS.
Proper installation, operation, and maintenance of tribal
approved EMPs are presumed to meet a landowner's or manager's
obligation for compliance with applicable WQS.
2. BMP effectiveness must be demonstrated. Once the BMPs
have been installed/applied and sufficient time has elapsed to
establish the controls and monitor their effectiveness,
attainment or maintenance of WQS and other water quality goals
should be verified. If subsequent evaluation indicates that
approved and properly implemented BMPs are not achieving WQS, the
Tribes should take steps to revise the BMPs, evaluate the WQS for
appropriateness, or both. Through the interactive process of
monitoring and adjustments of BMPs and/or WQS, it is anticipated
17
-------
and expected that BMPs will lead to achievement of WAS.
3. If BMPs cannot adequately protect and maintain water
quality standards, the Tribes must either revise the BMPs to
ensure protection and maintenance of WQS or revise the standards
or reevaluate the activity. If WQS are not being met, then the
Tribe may require that the NPS controls be modified or the
practice causing the nonpoint source pollution cease.
It should also be noted that EPA's regulations to implement
Section 303 (40 CFR Part 131) require that the Tribes adopt an
antidegradation policy. Antidegradation policy requires that:
1. Existing instream water uses and the level of water
quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be
maintained and protected;
2.Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to
support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and
recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained
and protected unless the Tribes find that after full satisfaction
of the intergovernmental coordination, that allowing lower water
quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social
development in the area in which the waters are located. In
allowing such degradation or lower water quality, the Tribes
shall assure water quality adequate to protect existing uses
fully. Further, the tribes shall assure that there shall be
achieved the highest statutory and regulatory requirements for
all new and existing point sources and all cost effective and
reasonable BMPs for nonpoint source control;
3. Where high quality waters constitute and Outstanding
National Resource, such as waters of National and State parks,
and wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional recreational or
ecological significance, that water quality shall be maintained
and protected.
Nonpoint pollution activities are not exempt from the
antidegradation policy. Tribes are required to assure that the
highest statutory and regulatory requirements for all new and
existing point sources and all cost effective and reasonable BMPs
for nonpoint source control shall be achieved. If a particular
activity will degrade water quality even after all these measures
are applied, Tribes have to:
1. Identify proposed water quality degradation (where and
to what degree water quality will be lowered);
2. Determine that the degradation is necessary to
accommodate important social or economic development.
Section 314 Section 314 of the CWA requires the Tribes to submit
18
-------
a biennial report on-water quality in lakes on the reservation.
These reports are to identify: eutrophic condition of tribal
lakes; processes to control sources of pollution in such lakes;
procedures in conjunction with appropriate federal agencies, to
restore the quality of such lakes; methods to mitigate effects of
high acidity; a list of tribal owned lakes for which uses are
impaired; and an assessment of the status and trends of water
quality in lakes including the -nature and extent of pollution
loading from point and nonpoint sources.
Funding is authorized to make grants to Tribes that have
submitted satisfactory lake water quality reports to control
pollution and restore and protect lakes. It is not know at this
time whether funding will appropriated to address nonpoint
pollution problems affecting lakes on the Fort Peck Reservation.
Section 319 The 1987 Water Quality Act passed by Congress
on February 4, 1987 amended the CWA to add a new Section 319,
entitled "Management of Nonpoint Sources of Pollution." Section
319 requires each Tribe to develop a comprehensive statewide
nonpoint pollution assessment report, and to submit a management
-program for control of nonpoint source pollution on the
reservation.
The assessment report should identify reservation waters,
which without additional action to control nonpoint sources of
pollution, cannot reasonable be expected to attain or maintain
applicable water quality standards or the goals or requirements
of the CWA. The assessment report should also identify
categories and subcategories of nonpoint sources, as well as
particular nonpoint sources that contribute pollution to
identified waters, and include descriptions of Tribal management
processes and control programs.
The nonpoint management programs are to include: best
management practices to reduce pollutant loadings from each
category and subcategory of nonpoint source pollution identified
in the Tribes' Assessment report; specific management programs to
achieve implementation of best management practices; a schedule
for program implementation; certification of necessary legal
authorities; and sources of funding to support implementation.
The assessment report and the management program must be
submitted to EPA, which has 180 days to approve or disapprove the
report and program.
Upon approval of the assessment report and management
program, Tribes are eligible for Section 319 grants from EPA to
assist in implementing the management program. The federal share
of implementation grants shall not exceed 75%. Eligible
implementation cost include costs of implementing regulatory or
non-regulatory programs for enforcement,- technical assistance..
financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer
19
-------
and demonstration projects. Monitoring which is done to support
design of watershed-level control programs or to evaluate a
particular implementation project is eligible. General
assessment and planning activities as well as administrative
costs are not considered implementation. Grants may also be
provided for protecting groundwater quality with the maximum
federal share set at 75%.
EPA has been directed give priority in making 319
implementation grants to nonpoint projects which will control
particularly difficult nonpoint source problems, implement
innovative control methods or practices, control interstate
nonpoint source pollution, or carry out groundwater quality
protection activities.
Each tribe is required to submit an annual report to EPA and
the Administrator of EPA is required to report annually to
Congress on the program.
Section 401 Section 401 of the Federal CWA requires that any
applicant apply for a federal license or permit for the conduct
of any activity which results in a discharge into the navigable
waters of the U.S.. The 401 certification authority is
administered on the Fort Peck Reservation by EPA. Section 401
provides the EPA with authority to assure that federally
permitted or licensed activities which can result in nonpoint
source pollution, do not violate Tribal Water Quality Standards
(State water quality standards specify uses for the waters of the
reservation, and the water quality criteria necessary to protect
those uses.)
Section 401 provides the Tribe with a mechanism to modify
potentially damaging federally permitted or licensed projects.
This authority is frequently applied toward dredge and fill
permits issued by the U.S. Army Cops of Engineers and licenses
issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Section 404 Section 404 of the Federal CWA establishes a
permit program for the discharge of dredged or fill material into
the waters of the U.S. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) ,
Omaha District, administers this program on the Fort Peck
Reservation. Discharges of dredged or fill material are
frequently associated with nonpoint source pollution-causing
activities occurring in or adjacent to streams and wetlands. The
404 permit program allows a mechanism to require implementation
of appropriate BMPs for the control of nonpoint source pollution
by stipulation of BMPs as a condition of the permit. The program
also allows opportunity for consultation among the COE, EPA,
USFWS, and Conservation Districts regarding appropriate BMPs.
Discharges of dredged or fill material into wetlands are
regulated under the 404 program. This serves as a significant
20
-------
means for protecting of wetlands, thus preserving their important
function in improving water quality through assimilation of
nutrients and retention of sediments.
3.1.2 USDI Bureau of Land Management
The BLM has monitored and funded hydrologic studies to
assess potential impacts on water resources on their lands since
1976. Data obtained from this program are entered onto STORET
and are updated annually.
3.1.3 Food Security Act of 1985 and Food and Agricultural
Trade Act 199Q
The provisions in these acts are designed to reduce soil
erosion and retain wetlands. The provisions generally known as
the Conservation Reserve, Conservation Compliance, Sodbuster, and
Swampbuster are described as follows:
Conservation Reserve - The conservation reserve officers
producers help in retiring highly erodible cropland. Through a
bidding process, farmers and ranchers may put eligible cropland
.into .a conservation reserve for 10 years and receive annual
payments on the basis of their bids. Vegetative cover is
necessary to protect the land from erosion and if successfully
bid into this program cannot be grazed or hayed. Harvesting of
commodity crops is prohibited.
Conservation Compliance - Conservation compliance applies if a
producer continues to plan annually tilled crops on highly
erodible fields. To remain eligible for USDA program benefits,
from the Farmers Home Administration, Soil Conservation Service,
Federal Crop Insurance and Agricultural Stabilization and
Conservation Service, the producer must have developed and be
actively applying a locally approved conservation plan on highly
erodible fields by January 1, 1990. The plan must be fully
implemented by January 1, 1995
Sodbuster - The sodbuster provision of the Food Security Act are
aimed at discouraging the conversion of highly erodible land for
agricultural production. If a producer converts highly erodible
noncropland to annually tilled crops, the producer may lose
eligibility for several other Department of Agriculture program
benefits. The producer will remain eligible only if the land is
farmed according to an approved conservation plan that is fully
implemented.
Swamsbuster - The swampbuster provision of the Act is aimed at
discouraging the conversion of wetlands for agricultural
purposes. The swampbuster was effective December 23, 1985, the
date the Food Security Act was signed. If a wetland is converted
to cropland, a producer will loose eligibility for certain USDA
-------
program benefits, not just on the converted wetland area, but on
all lands farmed. Some limited exceptions may be approved on a
case by case basis.
3.2 Tribal Laws
.In 1985, the Fort Peck Tribes and the state of Montana
negotiated a landmark water compact and developed a water code
which administers water use under the compact. The compact
determined the quantity of water reserved for the Tribes by
federal law and constitutes one of the major settlements of
Indian Water rights in the West. Key provisions of this compact
protected existing irrigation uses of the Fort Peck Irrigation
Project and of Indians on about 900 acres outside the project and
recognized the right of the Tribes to establish instream flows to
protect the Tribes' fish and wildlife. In 1990, the Tribes
established instream flow of not to exceed 58,503.59 acre feet on
various reservation streams, including Big Muddy Creek, Poplar
River, and Porcupine Creek.
Moreover, the code adopted pursuant to the compact provides
for the management and protection of the Tribes' water resources.
In particular, Title XI of the code prohibits the disposal of
wastes in a manner which contaminates or pollutes the Tribes'
water resources. It also requires sewage and garbage disposal
facilities to be operated in a manner which does not create a
public health hazard. (Title XI, sec. 202,203)
The Tribes have ample authority to manage and protect the
reservation's water resources, including the ability to implement
the nonpoint source management program.
3.3 Financial Assistance
3.3.1 Federal
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service Agricultural
Conservation Program
The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
(ASCS) of the USDA administers cost share programs which pay part
of the costs of BMPs which reduce erosion, reduce sediment
delivery and/or save water. The ASCS cost shares between 50 and
75 percent of the installation costs (up to $3500 per year) for
qualifying conservation practices. Cost sharing is provided
under annual agreements or under 3 to 10 year long term
agreements. Land owners may group together to solve soil and
water conservation problems and be eligible for up to $10,000
annually. These group projects are known as pooling agreements.
22
-------
Conservation Reserve Program
The Conservation Reserve Program was authorized by the Food
Security Act of 1985 and reauthorized by the Food and
Agricultural Trade Act of 1990. ASCS administers the financial
and compliance provisions of the Conservation Reserve Program
(CRP). Under the CRP, producers enter a contract to place highly
erodible cropland into a conservation reserve for a ten year
period. The producer seeds the land to permanent cover to
control erosion. Producer agree not to harvest, graze or crop
the land for ten years. Acreage basis, allotments and quotas are
reduced proportionately for the ten year contract period. A
significant change in the CRP program as of February 1988 allows
the inclusion of areas dedicated to a vegetative filter strip
along streams and permanent waterways. This strip to be planted
to grass, shrubs or trees will normally be between 66 and 99 feet
in width and should substantially increase streambank stability
while substantially reducing sediments and nutrients and other
chemicals from reaching water courses. Areas under CRP contract
as filter strips must have previously been cropland and do not
have to meet erodibility criteria of other CRP lands.
Rural Clean Water Program
The experimental Rural Clean Water Program, authorized in
agricultural appropriations legislation for 1980 (93 Stat. 831)
and 1981 (94 Stat. 3095), provides cost sharing and technical
assistance for installing measures that control nonpoint source
pollution and improve water quality in rural America. The
Federal cost share level for project areas is not to exceed 75
percent unless waived. Participants enter into long-term (3 to
10 years)contracts with the government.
Water Bank Program
The Water 'Bank Program, authorized in 1970, provides that
persons having eligible wetlands in important migratory waterfowl
nesting, breeding, and feeding areas could enter into 10 year
agreements and receive annual payments for preventing the serious
loss of wetlands and for preserving, restoring, and improving
inland fresh water and designated adjacent areas.
Soil Conservation Service
The Soil Conservation Service administers three major
programs which provide financial assistance to projects which may
reduce pollution from nonpoint sources. These programs are
Public Law 566, the Great Plains Conservation Program, and the
Resource Conservation and Development Program. The Tribes have
signed a Memorandum of Agreement with the Soil Conservation
Service which outlines the types of technical assistance the
23
-------
Tribes can expect to receive from SCS concerning nonpoint source
pollution abatement activities on the reservation.
Great Plains Conservation Program
The purpose of the Great Plains Conservation Program is to
conserve, protect, develop, and utilize the soil and water
resources of the Great Plains region. Land users voluntarily
enter into long term contracts with the USDA to solve soil,
water, and related resource problems. The legislation authorizes
assistance to farmers and ranchers to prepare and implement
conservation plans that control soil erosion and reduce the
effects of the severe and erratic Great Plains climate.
Appropriations for this program have remained fairly constant at
about $20 million annually over the last decade.
The Great Plains Conservation Program is unique in several
respects. First, it is targeted to a specific region of the
country running north and south through parts of 418 counties
in 10 states from Montana and North Dakota to New' Mexico and
Texas. Forty six of Montana's 56 counties are within the program
boundaries. Second, it utilizes a conservation plan as a basis
for a long term (3 to 10 year) contract between the private land
user and-the Federal Government. Third, it focuses on total
conservation treatment of the entire operating unit as opposed to
individual field treatment. Fourth, private land users receive
cost sharing as contracted for installing enduring conservation
practices and systems at rate not to exceed 80 percent of the
cost and up to a total of $35,000 per contract. Fifth, it
provides for federal technical assistance to service the
contract. Sixth, it commits the private land user to carry out
and maintain all treatments required, in the contract regardless
of whether or not they are cost shared.
Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D)
The SCS provides financial assistance to six Resource
Conservation and Development Area RC&Ds: the Bitteroot, the
Central Montana, the Eastern Plains, the'Headwaters, the North
West Regional and the Beartooth. These REC&Ds cover 38 counties
and can provide money and technical expertise for installing
projects which include erosion control, flood prevention and
water quality. Financial assistance varies between 50 and 100
percent for qualifying projects. Loans for the part of projects
not covered by cost share are available through the Farm Home
Administration. RC&Ds also provide valuable coordination for
cooperation between individuals and units of government. In
recent years, RC&Ds have been successful in obtaining grants for
conservation oriented projects from nontraditional funding
sources. The Headwater REC&D has set up a grants library to help
in the search for potential funding sources.
24
-------
Public Law 566
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act. Under this
public law (83-566) projects can be multipurpose but the drainage
areas treated cannot be larger than 250,000 acres. The SCS
provides technical assistance for planning and installing project
measures, pays the full cost of measures for flood prevention and
shares the cost of other measures. Major water quality benefits
include control of flooding , erosion and siltation. Loans for
the nonfederal portion of the se projects.up to ten million
dollars per project may be obtained from Farmers Home
Administration (FmHA). Projects may include but are not limited
to activities such as reservoirs, canals, pipelines, and seeding.
Abandoned Mine Lands
The Abandoned Mine Lands Bureau, Reclamation Division,
Department of State Lands (DSL) is authorized to expend funds
received from the federal Office of Surface Mining (OSM) for
reclamation of lands disturbed by the mining of coal, uranium,
hardrock minerals and open cut minerals, respectively, left in
unreclaimed condition. Public Law 95-87, Surface Mining Control
and Reclamation Act, Title VI, 1977 and Montana Code Annotated,
Section 82-4-239,323, and 424 authorize administration of the
program. The Governor designated DSL to administer the program
on November 15, 1977. -The OSM approved the DSL plan on February
6, 1980.The OSM collects a federal tax of $0.35 per ton of coal
produced at the mine. Fifty percent of the tax, approximately $5
million annually, is allocated to the state program. Sites are
prioritized and reclaimed based on criteria specified in the
plan.
Fanners Home Administration
The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) makes loans and
grants in rural areas. Several of these below market rate loans
benefit water quality concerns, soil and water loans are made to
individual fanners and ranchers to develop, conserve, and
properly use their land and water resources, and abate pollution.
Loans are also available to associations of land owners to
improve irrigation and other soil and water conservation
facilities. Loans are authorized to supplement other programs of
the USDA such as the Small Watershed Protection and Flood
Prevention Act (PL566) and the Resource Conservation and
Development (RC&D) project activities.
Bureau of Reclamation
Since its inception in 1902, the Bureau of Reclamation's
primary function has been developing irrigation projects in the
western United States through various programs to enhance the
farm economy.
25
-------
A number of programs have been established to provide
assistance to irrigation districts for improved operation and
management of the projects. Programs which may be applicable to
the Tribes' nonpoint source pollution program are generally a
combination of financial and technical assistance and are as
follows:
1. The Soil and Moisture Conservation (S&MC) Program
provides assistance to irrigation projects for management of
project related erosion problems. At the present time funding
for this program is limited; however, the program is capable of
providing assistance with control of sediment from Reclamation
irrigation projects.
2. Land Resource Management (LRM) Program is primarily
aimed at management of Federal lands around Reclamation
reservoirs. This is the major program along with some S&MC
funds, used to control grazing, erosion, and needed revegetation.
3. The Reclamation Reform Act requires that irrigation
districts with repayment or water service contracts developed
with Bureau guidance and assistance, plans for conservation of
water.
4. The Recreation Management Program has been used for
stabilization of lands in areas developed for recreation.
5. The LRM Program is also used for management of vehicular
uses, both on and off road on reservoir lands. Closing of roads
and areas for off-road vehicular use depends on policy guidelines
and available funding.
6. The Rehabilitation and Betterment (R&B) Program provides
loans and engineering design assistance for rebuilding, and
replacement of antiquated features of irrigation projects. This
provides better management, utilization, and conservation of
water applied to irrigated croplands.
7. Reclamation is participating in the Department of the
Interior irrigation return flow water quality study. This study
will provide background data concerning nutrients, pesticides,
and toxic metals, primarily selenium and arsenic in irrigation
return flows.
8. The Bureau provides funds for basic data collection at
many of the USGS gaging stations and associated water quality
monitoring activities on the Fort Peck Reservation.
9. At the Tribes' request, the Bureau can provide technical
assistance in identifying problems associated with irrigation
projects. This program may be available to assist in
establishing BMPs on irrigation projects.
26
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
The Environmental Protection Agency provides financial
assistance to Tribes for activities related to nonpoint source
pollution control under several sections of the CWA. Under
Section 319 of the CWA, financial assistance can be provided to
Tribes for the implementation of Tribal Nonpoint Source Pollution
Management Programs.. Section 319 asks that Tribes prepare a
comprehensive reservation wide nonpoint pollution assessment
report and a management program.
Upon approval of the assessment report and management
program. Tribes are eligible for Section 319 grants from EPA to
assist in implementing the management program. The federal share
of implementation grants shall not exceed 75 percent. Eligible
implementation costs include costs of implementing regulatory or
non-regulatory programs for enforcement, technical assistance,
financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer
and demonstration projects. Monitoring which is done to support
design of watershed level control programs or to evaluate a
particular implementation project is eligible. General
assessment and planning activities as well as administrative
costs are not considered implementation. Grants may also be
provided for protection ground water quality with the maximum
federal share set at 75%.
EPA has been directed to give priority in making 319
implementation grants to nonpoint projects which will control
particularly difficult nonpoint source problems, implement
innovative control methods or practices, control interstate
nonpoint source pollution, or carry out groundwater quality
protection activities.
3.4 Roles of Agencies/Technical Assistance
3.4.1 Federal
Soil Conservation Service The SCS provides technical assistance
for the Farm Agricultural and Trade Act, the Great Plains, the
PL566 Small Watershed and the RC&D programs as explained
previously in the financial assistance section of this document.
There is additional technical assistance provided directly and
indirectly through several other programs.
The SCS of the USDA provides technical assistance to
landowners and users throughout the nation without charge through
their conservation assistance program. In this program the SCS
determines where conservation practices are necessary, prepares
conservation plans, designs specific practices and supervises and
certifies proper installation as appropriate. They have
professional staff expertise in the following resource areas:
range, plant science, agronomy, biology, forestry, soils,
27
-------
archeology, sociology, water resources, hydrology and
environmental, civil, agricultural and hydraulic engineering.
Most of the BMPs for agriculture were selected from the Montana
SCS standards and specifications for conservation practices.
The SCS operates a Plant Materials Center in Bridger,
Montana with primary emphasis on developing new plants for
conservation purposes. Many of these materials can be used for
mine reclamation and stabilization of critically eroding areas
which can impact water quality.
The SCS has the lead role in completing soil surveys on all
nonfederal land. This information includes erosiveness of soils,
percolation and infiltration rates and many other parameters that
help managers plan appropriate BMPs that protect water quality.
Snow survey is another program that has potential water
quality benefits. The prediction of flooding and streamflow
potentials is useful in managing water levels in reservoirs to
minimize flooding damages and matching crops to expected
irrigation water availability. Snow course information has also
added useful background information for pH.studies.
3.4.2 State and Local
Montana Extension Service The Montana Extension Service (MES) is
part of a three-way partnership consisting of federal, state, and
county partners. The Extension Service (ES) at the USDA level
provides support for State Extension organizations by overseeing
the distribution of federal funds, by reviewing programs, and by
alerting states about federal priorities and programs.
ES is the educational arm of the Department of Agriculture
with offices in most of the counties in the nation. At the
county level, extension agents provide education information,
materials, publications, and advice in the major areas of
agricultural production and natural resources.
MES involvement in the national Non Point Source (NPS)
effort focuses on information and education programs that develop
awareness of (1) the nature, scope, and impacts of NPS pollution,
(2) the need to employ the best management practices to reduce
NPS pollutant inputs to surface and groundwater and (3) the
mechanisms to integrate such best management practices into the
production systems.
Conservation Districts There are 59 conservation districts in
Montana. The districts are legal subdivisions of state
government responsible under statute for soil and water
conservation activities.within their boundaries. In carrying out
their responsibilities, districts develop and carry out long
28
-------
range programs that result in the conservation and improvement of
our soil and water resources, provide assistance in the planning
and application of conservation measures, and encourage maximum
participation of the general public and all local public and
private agencies to fulfill this purpose. Conservation districts
represent about 15,000 cooperators totaling around 44 million of
the 61 million acres of private lands in the state. These
numbers are increasing significantly because of the Food Security
Act and other responsibilities placed on districts.
Conservation districts are the designated local management
agency for nonpoint source pollution control programs, in Montana.
The districts have been involved in water quality improvement
programs for many years. Under the earlier Section 208 program,
for example, districts were instrumental in the statewide
nonpoint source assessment, in public education efforts and in
the development of local plans for nonpoint source pollution
control as well as the statewide 208 plan.
Districts will play a vital role in the reservation NFS
program proposed under Section 319. They will provide guidance
and assistance in the implementation of selected BMPs's by
district cooperators and will cooperate in a water quality
education program in an effort to decrease agricultural nonpoint
source pollution.
State of Montana Non Point Source Pollution Program The Fort
Peck Tribes will participate in the State's NFS program when the
level of technical and financial needs exceeds the Tribal program
capabilities. The Tribal NFS and the State NFS programs are
commensurate and will effectively protect all waters of the State
of Montana and the Fort Peck -Indian Reservation.
4.0 Formulation of Best Management.Practices
Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act requires each
tribe to describe tribal and local programs for controlling
pollution from nonpoint sources. There are numerous programs,
administered by a variety of agencies, which aim to control.
nonpoint source pollution. County conservation districts are
designated the nonpoint source management agencies for non-
federal lands. The program is intended to encourage adoption and
implementation of best management practices (BMPs). Technical
assistance, education, demonstration projects, and financial
assistance are used to implement BMPs.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture cost-share programs offer
financial incentives for implementation of best management
practices on agricultural lands on the Fort Peck Reservation.
The Corps of Engineers 404 Dredge and Fill Permit Program
controls nonpoint source pollution resulting from
29
-------
hydromodification activities. The Montana Salinity Control
Association, a consortium of conservation districts in dryland
fanning area, provides educational and technical assistance to .
implement agricultural management practices to control saline
seep. The Superfund program administered by the Environmental
Protection Agency offers the Potential for correcting nonpoint
pollution problems related to toxic and hazardous waste sites,
including some abandoned mine waste problems.
The Tribal Water Resource Control Commission conducts water
quality monitoring, assesses and prioritizes nonpoint and point
source problems, develops solutions, and provides management of
these problems. A priority list is kept of stream segments and
lakes that have assessed, man-caused water quality problems. The
list is used to focus and conserve limited management resources.
The following categories and subcategories of nonpoint
sources have been designated by EPA and used in this report. All
but on Silviculture, have to some extent or another caused
impairment of Fort Peck Reservation waters.
4.1.1 Agriculture
Non-irrigated crop production
Irrigated crop production
Specialty crop production (e.g.,truck farming,or
orchards)
Pasture land (Grazing)
Feedlots - all types
Aquaculture
Animal holding/management areas
Rangeland (Grazing)
Streambank erosion
4.1.2 Construction
Highway/road/bridge
Land Development
Streambank erosion
4.1.3 Urban Runoff
Storm sewers
Combined sewers
Surface runoff
Streambank erosion
4.1.4 Resource Extraction/Exploration/development
Surface mining
Subsurface mining
Petroleum activities
Streambank erosion
30
-------
4.1.5 Land Disposal (runoff/leachate from permitted areas)
Sludge
Wastewater
Landfills
Industrial land treatment
On-site wastewater systems (septic tanks, etc)
Hazardous waste
4.1.6 Hvdromodi f i cat ion
Channelization
Dredging
Dam construction/operation
Flow regulation/modification
Streambank erosion
Removal of riparian vegetation
Bridge construction
Streambank modification/destabilization
4.1.7 Other
Atmospheric deposition
Waste storage/storage tank leaks
Highway maintenance and runoff
Spills
Natural
4.2. Best Management Practices
Categories, subcategories and specific sources of nonpoint
pollution of Fort Peck Reservation are listed in Table 4 of this
report, Section 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act requires each
tribe to describe its process for identifying the measures it
will use to control these categories, subcategories arid sources.
Four nonpoint source categories are responsible for a
significant fraction of the threatened or impaired waterbodies on
the reservation: Agriculture, hydromodification, mining, and
land disposal. Active mining, land disposal, and
hydromodification activities are regulated under various
ordinances administered by the Tribal Council. Best Management
Practices (BMFs) have been developed and are identified in the
Fort Peck Non-point Source Management Plan.
Fort Peck's Section 319 program will emphasize agriculture.
The process for identifying BMPs for this category will consist j
of adopting USDA-Soil Conservation Service Field Office Technical^
Guide standards.
4.2.1 Agriculture
The BMPs selected from the SCS standards and specification
31
-------
are currently in use by a majority of the producers on the
reservation (Table 4). Additional BMPs addressing pesticide
application, fertilizer management and streambank stabilization
may need to be added.
One or more BMPs known as a resource management system will
be selected for each land use within a targeted watershed.
Proper application of a resource management system will insure
the NPS pollution is minimized. Cooperation agencies will
develop new BMPs if appropriate ones do not exist to solve a
specific problem.
Utilization of agricultural BMPs for nonpoint source water
pollution control on Fort Peck is voluntary. Success in solving
nonpoint source pollution problems- has been limited primarily to
smaller streams and projects.
Cost-share programs are available to help pay the cost of
applying BMPs, but in most cases ranchers and fanners are unable
to provide matching funds. 319 program provides incentives to
help farmers and ranchers implement BMP's. In cases of need,
Tribal sources may be used to augment implementation of BMP's.
Table 4 Agricultural Best Management Practices
SCS Agricultural
Practice Name Code Subcateaorv
Access Road 560 1,2,3
Bedding 310 2,3
Channel- vegetation 322 2
Chiseling and subsoiling 324 1,2,3
Clearing and snagging 326 1,2,3,4
Conservation cropping
sequence 328 2,3
Conservation tillage 329 2,3
Contour Farming 330 2,3
Cover and green manure crop 340 2,3
Critical area planting 342 1,2,3,4
Crop residue use 344 2,3
Dam, floodwater retarding 402 1,2,3,4
Dike 356 1,2,3,4
Diversion 362 1,2,3,4
Emergency tillage 365 2,3
Farmstead and feedlot
windbreak 380 4
Fencing 382 1,2,3,4
Field windbreak 392 2,3
Filter strip 393 2,3
32
-------
Table 4, cont. SCS Agricultural
Practice Name Code Subcateaorv
Floodwater diversion
Floodway
Grade stabilization structure
Grassed waterway
Grasses and legumes in
rotation
Grazing land mechanical
treatment
Irrigation canal or lateral
Irrigation field ditch
Irrigation land leveling
Irrigation pit or
regulating reservoir
Irrigation storage reservoir
Irrigation system
Trickle
Sprinkler
Surface and subsurface
Irrigation system, tailwater
Recovery
Irrigation water conveyance
Ditch and canal lining
Pipeline
Irrigation water management
Land smoothing
Lined waterway or outlet
Livestock exclusion
Mulching
Pasture and Hayland mgt.
Pasture and hayland planting
Pipeline
Planned grazing systems
Pond
Pond sealing or lining
Proper grazing use
Pumped well drain
Pumping plant for
water control
Range seeding
Rock barrier
Runoff management system
Sediment basin
Soil salinity management
Soil Moisture mgt. for
saline seep
Spring development
Streambank and shoreline-
protection
400
404
410
412
411
548
320
388
464
552-A-B
436
441
442
443
447
428-A-C
430-AA-II
449
446
463
472
484
510
512
516
556
378
521-A-E
528
532
533
550
555
570
350
573
Interim
574
580
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
2,3
2,3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
2,3,4
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3,4
1
1,2
1,2
1
4
3
1
1,2, 4
4
1,2,3,4
2
2
1,2
1,2,3,4
33
,
-------
Table 4 cont'd SCS Agricultural
Practice Name Code Subcateaorv
Stream channel stabilization 584 1,2,3,4
Stripcropping
Contour 585 2
Field 586 2
Wind 589 2
Structure for water control 587 1,2,3,4
Stubble Mulch 588 2
Subsurface drain 606 2,3,4
Subsurface drainage
Field ditch 607 3
Main or lateral 608 3
Tall Wheatgrass Barriers Interim 2
Terrace 600 3
Toxic salt reduction 610 2,3
Trough or tank 614 1, 4
Table 4 continued. . .
Waterspreading 640 1, 3
Well 642 1,2,3,4 '
Windbreak renovation 650 2
AGRICULTURAL SUBCATEGORIES
1. Rangeland/Grazing
2. Dryland
3. Irrigated
4. Feedlots/Animal Holding
4.2.2 Hvdromodi f i cat ion
Best Management practices for hydrologic and habitat
modification often relate directly to other categories of
nonpoint source pollution. For example, grazing practices may
impact stream hydrology by changing seasonal flow patterns and
water yield. Agricultural activities may involve placement of
irrigation diversions in streams. The majority of
hydromodification activities on Fort Peck are regulated under
tribal ordinance and/or Section 404 permits.
34
-------
Funding Sources
-------
Potential Tribal Funding Sources
-------
POTENTIAL TRIBAL FUNDING SOURCES
FEDERAL SOURCES
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). USEPA provides financial assistance to tribes
for activities related to nonpoint source pollution control under several sections of the Clean Water Act
(CWA), including Section 319. For more information contact Amy Gambrill at (202) 260-7105.
USEPA also provides funding through Section 106. This funding varies by region and has been used to
develop and implement 319 programs. Projects conducted with this funding include mitigation, offsite water
wells, and cross fencing.
USEPA offers funds through the General Assistance Program. In 1997, $28 million is available for
program development projects. These funds are flexible and can be used for a variety of projects, including
developing a 319 program.
In addition, USEPA offers funding through the CWA Section 104B(3) National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Set-aside Program. This funding is available for watershed coordination
projects and projects that integrate point and nonpoint source pollution prevention.
USEPA also provides funding through its Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program. This
program was initiated in FY 1996 with $500,000 in funds, and at least $500,000 will be available in FY
1997. The grant program is designed to encourage community involvement in environmental improvement
projects. For more information contact the Office of Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program at
(202) 260-9365.
USEPA's Pollution Prevention Office and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) jointly fund the
Agriculture in Concert with the Environment Program. This program is intended to promote the adoption
of sustainable practices and reduce the misuse of nutrients and pesticides. In 1996, $ 1 million in funding was
offered for sustainable agriculture projects. For more information contact Rhonda Miller at (801) 797-0351.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). USDA provides financial assistance to tribes through
several programs. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) is new money offered through
the Farm Bill Amendments of 1996. This program has been used for tribal projects such as a pipeline project
to reestablish riparian areas on Fort Peck tribal lands. The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation
Service (ASCS) administers cost share programs that provide partial funding for best management practices
(BMPs) that reduce erosion, reduce sediment delivery, or conserve water. ASCS also administers the
Conservation Reserve Program, which encourages placing highly erodible cropland into conservation
reserves and also supports the establishment of vegetative filter strips on cropland along streams and
permanent waterways.
The Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) Program is funded through USDA's
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service to encourage agricultural research. Funding is
provided for projects that maintain and enhance the quality and productivity of soil resources; conserve soil,
water, energy, natural resources, and fish and wildlife habitat; and maintain and enhance the quality of surface
and ground water. One million dollars is expected for funding annually. For more information contact
Rhonda Miller at (801) 797-0351.
Tribal Nonpoint Source Workshop February 25-26, 1997
-------
The Farmers Home Administration, funded through USDA, offers loans and grants in rural areas. Soil and
water loans are made to individual farmers and ranchers to develop, conserve, and properly use their land and
water resources, as well as abate pollution. Loans are also authorized for associations of landowners to
improve irrigation and other soil and water conservation facilities.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), as part of USDA, administers three major programs.
One NRCS funding program is the Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) funding, which has
been used for projects dealing with erosion control, flood prevention, and maintaining water quality. Another
NRCS program is the Great Plains Conservation Program. This program was established to conserve,
protect, develop, and use the soil and water resources of the Great Plains region. NRCS also administers the
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, Public Law 566. Under this act funding can be acquired
for flood prevention and other BMPs for lands in drainage areas smaller than 250,000 acres.
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). B1A offers funding through several sources. Section 638 funds lose their
federal identity as soon as they are received by a tribe, thereby enabling tribes to use this funding as part of
their cost share. Funding through section 638 has been used to successfully conduct nitrate contamination
studies on an agricultural land area. An additional BIA funding source is the Range Improvement Fund, a
relatively small set-aside that can be accessed through proposals. For more information contact the BIA
Environmental Services Department at (202) 208-3606.
United States Geological Survey (USGS). Funding has been obtained from USGS by the Fort Peck Tribes
for a ground water project entailing a nitrate contamination study of an agricultural land area and outreach
activities.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). USFWS offers a grant program for which tribes are
eligible. This program can be used for projects such as installing fencing, drilling wells, and constructing
dams.
STATE SOURCES
For the state of Montana, funding was secured for tribal projects through the state's Water Quality Bureau,
Nonpoint Source Branch. Funds were applied to a ground water project in which a nitrate contamination
study was conducted on an agricultural land area. The state extension service is also contributing to the
project by assisting with the outreach component.
LOCAL SOURCES
Universities. Universities are a potential resource for technical assistance on projects. Montana State
University is assisting the Fort Peck Tribes with a ground water project by gathering a portion of the ground
water data and by modeling all data compiled for the project.
Ducks Unlimited. Ducks Unlimited provides funding for streamside restoration projects and projects that
enhance wetlands and riparian areas. Ducks Unlimited and the Yakima Tribe in Washington formed a
partnership and successfully completed a $ 1 million project. For more information contact Eric Schenck at
(202) 347-1530 or Larry Brooks at (701) 228-5457.
Tribal Nonpoint Source Workshop February 25-26, 1997
-------
The Nature Conservancy (TNC). TNC has worked with tribes in the midwestern and western regions of the
country. TNC and a tribal representatives of the Bad River Indian Reservation in Wisconsin formed a
partnership to develop a conservation program for a portion of the Bad River. The TNC Western Regional
Office has also completed several projects with tribes in the West. For more information contact Linda Lee
at(303)444-1060.
TRIBAL SOURCES
Tribal Banks. The Blackfeet National Bank in Browning, Montana, offers loans for tribal projects
nationwide. For more information contact Jack Kelly at (406) 338-7000.
Tribal Casinos. Tribal casinos offer grants for tribes for small business ventures and for environmental
projects (e.g., Pequot Tribe in Connecticut).
Tribal Colleges. Tribal colleges receive funds through USDA as part of the 1994 Land Grant Institutions
Act. Twenty-nine tribal colleges are eligible to receive interest from an endowment program to put toward
educational purposes. In addition, $50,000 is available annually for each tribal college to conduct food and
agriculture projects. Extension work is also conducted at the tribal colleges through the USDA Extension
Activities Office. The scope of the extension programs includes agriculture; community resource and
economic development; family development and resource management; 4-H and youth development;
leadership and volunteer development; natural resources and environmental management; and nutrition, diet,
and health. A new program is planned to be funded in 1997. This program is intended to provide $2 million
to tribal colleges for a broad range of projects, including environmental and agricultural projects. For more
information contact Joan Gill at (202) 720-6487.
TribalNonpointSource Workshop February 25-26, 1997
-------
Summary of EPA's Indian Program
Funding
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
FEB -6 1997
OFFICE OF
WATER
NOTE TO: Members of the Tribal Caucus, EPA Tribal Operations Committee
I am pleased to provide you with a report on the 1998 President's Budget for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which was released today by EPA Administrator
Browner at a press conference in Washington, DC. I believe the 1998 President's Budget shows
the Administrator remains firm in her commitment to continue building a strong EPA/Tribal
partnership and improving public health and the environment in Indian Country.
EPA proposes to increase grants to Indian Tribes for developing and implementing Tribal
environmental programs by $31 million, from $46 million in 1997 to $77 million in 1998. (For
comparison, a total of $18 million was available for program grants to Indian Tribes in 1994.)
The most significant increases are as follows:
o a $10.6 million increase in grants to Tribes under the Indian Environmental General
Assistance Program (GAP) Act, from $28 million in 1997 to $38.6 million in 1998, for
planning, developing and establishing the capability to administer multi-media
environmental programs;
o a $9.8 million increase in grants for Tribal water quality management programs, from
$5 million in 1997 to $14.8 million in 1998;
o a $3.8 million increase in grants to Tribes for supervising public drinking water systems,
from $2.7 million in 1997 to $6.5 million in 1998; and
o a $4.3 million increase in grants for Tribal Air Programs, from $5.9 million in 1997 to
$10.2 million in 1998.
Attachment 1 shows the State and Tribal requests for each of the seventeen EPA program
assistance grants.
Funds for Tribal water sanitation projects would total $30.6 million in 1998, including
$10.9 million for Indian drinking water needs. (This amount, by law, is 1.5% of the EPA monies
for drinking water infrastructure.) $5.4 million would be available for Tribal wastewater projects.
(This amount, by law, is 0.5% of EPA's wastewater infrastructure fund.) EPA would use an
additional $14.4 million to fund water sanitation projects for Alaska Tribes.
Rซcyded/R*cyclabl* . Printed with Vegetable Ol Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Posleonsumer)
-------
Complete information is not available yet on EPA's in-house resources for program and
technical assistance to Tribal environmental programs, for overseeing Tribal grants, and for direct
implementation of federal environmental programs in Indian Country. We will send you this
information as soon as it is available.
Finally, I have attached excerpts from the summary of the 1998 EPA Budget released
These excer
Program highlights.
today. These excerpts provide an overview of the complete EPA budget and softie Indian
I hope you will find this information to be useful. Please do not hesitate to call me at
(202) 260- 1 489 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Tom Wall, Acting Director
American Indian Environmental Office
Attachments
cc: Kathy Gorospe, AEO Director Designate
EPA Senior Indian Program Managers
EPA National Indian Workgroup
-------
O
P
ERA'S INDIAN PROGRAM
$120
O $100
ง
$80
$60
$40
3
$20
$0
'President's Request
wu
$99
$35
$51
$85
/
'94
'95 '96
Fiscal Years
'97
-------
EPA'S INDIAN PROGRAMS
(Dollars in Thousands)
WATER QLTY/DW
WATER INFRASTRUCTURE
' AIR QUALITY
HAZ/SOLID WASTE
PESTICIDES
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
# MULTIMEDIA
LUST
SUPERFUND
MANAGEMENT & SUPPORT
FY 1995 FY 1997
Actuals Pres. Bud,
$9,620 $12,720
$18,901 $30,000
$1,599 .$9,343
. $3,179 $5,812
tp56
$1
$1,080
$984
'I- $33,479
......I $1,283
$2,o41 $3,955
$191 $103
$51,896 $98,759
Because FY 1 996 budget authority is not yet determined, pending enactment of an
FY 1996 appropriations bill, resources for FY 1996 do not appear in this table. ;
.
The multimedia account includes $28 millioTfar General Assistance Program Grants.
-------
In 1998, The Agency's Budget Trials $7.6 BiUion
D Operating Programs
E2 Trust Funds
tZ3 Water Infrastructure
S7.558M
$7,645 M
$6,515 M $6,459JK
$6382 M
$5,568M
$2,662
I
$6,799 M
$6.281 M
.... .'. . ซ. .ป-t - ,., t-*tj- ป^Tj
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Notes: State, Local, and Tribal grants previously captured in the Operating Programs
ytvwnitod far in Water TnfipgginirLiiro hAgi^Tiing in IQQfi
The Agency's W>rkyear Ceiling Increases in 1998
r~i Operating Programs
0 Trust Funds
16,415
12,814
13,291
W
0 17,106 17,508^ 17,082 y
Tly A/ / / Af-
13,575
13,330
3.776
13,801
13,580
X/x'x'
17,951 Ifi^
14,207
14,409
13,874
1991 1992
1993 1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
8
-------
Attachment 2
Summary of EPA Resources Provided Directly to Tribal Governments
FY 1997 President's Budget
Financial Assistance for Tribal Programs
GAP Grants
$28,000.00
Water Quality (section 106)
$4,964.00
WQ Cooperative Agreements
$1,000.00
Wetlands Grants
$915.00
Nonpoint Source Grants
$330.00
Drinking .Water (PWSS) Grants'"
$2,700.00
Underground Injection Control
$525.00:
Air Grants (Section 105)
$5,882.00
Pesticides Program Grants
$644.00
Underground Storage Tanks
$450.00
SUBTOTAL
$45,410.00
Financial Assistance for Water Infrastructure
Alaska Native Villages
$15,000.00
Drinking Water SRF Set-Aside
$8,250.00
Clean Water SRF Set-Aside
$6,750.00
SUBTOTAL
$30,000.00
TOTAL
$75,410.00
* A portion of Public Water System Supervision Grants and Underground
Injection Control Grants are used by EPA to directly implement Federal
Environmental laws on Tribal lands.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SUMMARY OF AGENCY RESOURCES
- *: __,.;_ . (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) __
tJiT"; : ,
Environmental Programs al Management
Air
Water Quality
-Drinking Water
- Hazardous Waste
-Pesticides
-Radiation
- Multimedia
--Toxic Substances
' Support
^Tlfrn^TTll pnfin"H""^^^v ^^ niiiiiuirt.
State, Local, and Tribal Grants (STAG)
Buildings and Facilities
Science and Technology
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
Oil Spills
SUBTOTAL OPERATING PROGRAMS
Hazardous Substance Response
Trust Fund (Superfund)
OIG Superfund
Superfund Research
SUBTOTAL SUPERFUND
s -
T .Pairing TTnHnrgroand Storage
Tank Trust Fond (LUST)
OIG LUST
SUBTOTAL LUST
Water Infruiilrucluie Financing (STAG)
GRAND TOTAL
1997
CURRENT
ESTIMATE
$253,206.4
272,847.4
94,512.9
174,007.3
104,526.1
17,689.2
274,818.7
78,892.8
[242,540
[239,180..
481,720.2
$674,207.0
$87,220.0
$552,000.0
28,500.0
15,000.0
$3,109,148.0
$1,348,245.0
11,000.0
35,000.0
$1,394^45.0
$59,423.0
577.0
$60,000.0
$2^36,000.0
$6,799,393.0
80
1998
PRESIDENTS
BUDGET
$312,980.3
274,865.4
105,317.9
181,061.2
105,824.5
16,846.5
307,425.1
86,397.0
[249,663.9]
[247,209.1]
496,873.0
$715,257.0
$141,420.0
$614,269.4
28,500.0
15,000.0
$3,402,037.3
$2,042,847.8
1L64L3
39,755.9
$2,094^45.0
$71^10.7
0.0
$2,078,000.0
$7,645,493.0
1998-1997
DD?FERENCE
TOTAL
+$59,7735
+2,018.0
+10,805.0
+7,053.9
+1^98.4
842.7
+32,606.4
+7,504^
[+7,123.9]
[+8,028.9]
+15,152.8
+$41,050.0
+$54,200.0
+$62,269.4
0.0
0.0
+$292,889.3
+$694,602.8
+64L3
+4,755.9
+$700,000.0
+$11,787,7
-577.0
+$11,210.7
4158,000.0
+$846,100.0
-------
Outreach Information
-------
Getting in Step
-------
Getting in Step - A Pathway to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed
Charlie MacPherson
Public Outreach Coordinator
Tetra Tech, Inc.
10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
(703) 385-6000
Barry Tonning
Nonpoint Source Project Director
Gateway District Health Department
Gudgell Avenue
Owingsville, Kentucky 40360
(606) 674-6396
Getting In Step
Is your message being heard? Is it being heard by the people who need to hear it? The key to
successful outreach is targeting your message to a specific audience and getting the audience to
respond to your message.
There is a definite pathway, or process, to follow to achieve effective outreach in your watershed.
How many times has your organization started to do a fact sheet or a newsletter before deciding what
they want to say and who they want to say it to? By following the pathway, your organization can
prepare targeted outreach materials to satisfy the goals and objectives of your program.
This session will review the basic building blocks to effective outreach and then focus on enhancing
outreach materials and using the media to get your message out.
Building Blocks
There are six essential building blocks to effective
outreach. Each block builds on the previous block and
each block is essential to achieving the desired result.
Block 1. Define Your Objective.
First you must decide what you want to accomplish.
Your objective should be specific and results-oriented.
The more specific you make your objective, the easier it
will be to develop your message, identify your target
audience, and evaluate the success of your outreach
efforts. For example, if you state your objective as
"Teaching the general public about nonpoint source
pollution," you will have a very difficult time evaluating
the success of your efforts due to the vague objective and
unwieldy target audience. Restating your objective as
"Educate homeowners with lawns about proper techniques
for fertilizer application to reduce the amount of nitrogen
and phosphorus runoff into nearby streams" will help
target your message and increase the likelihood of the
audience hearing the message.
EVALUATION
MESSAGE
"TARGET
AUDIENCE
OBJECTIVE
-------
Block 2. Identify Your Target Audience.
Once you have defined your objective, you must decide who you are trying to reach. Chances are
you will identify several different target audiences for each objective. The more specific you make
your audiences the easier it will be to develop a targeted message for that audience. Once you have
identified your audience, you need to collect information about the members of that audiencetheir
demographic make-up, knowledge of the message, and attitudes about/perceptions of the message and
the various communication channels they use. You will use this information to develop a message
that is targeted to your audience's needs and use formats that they are likely to encounter.
Several resources are available for collecting this information. In addition to the Census Bureau or
marketing research firms, resources include the following:
Focus Groups: Ask five to seven members of your target audience to participate in a 1- to 2-
hour facilitated discussion of the issues. Make sure your facilitator is well-
versed on the issues.
Convenient Samples: Identify where you can easily access your target audience and ask a subset
population a series of questions to gain insight. For example, if you want to
find out about habits of people who change their own oil, an auto parts store
might be a good place to find members of your target audience.
Trade Associations: Talk to trade associations to gather information about their members. For
example, boating associations can provide insights as to why their members
sometimes discharge their sewage into coastal waters instead of using pumpout
stations. You might discover that most boaters are unaware of pumpout
locations, leading you to develop a message that includes locations of the
pumpout stations in the area.
Block 3. Develop Your Message.
Now that you are armed with all kinds of background information on your target audience, you are
ready to develop the message. The message you send out should not be your objective. Your
message will help you to meet your objective, but your message should be very specific, show a
benefit to your audience, and be action-oriented. Put yourself in the position of your target audience
and ask yourself the questions they will ask: "Why should I care about this? What's in it for me?"
Specific benefits for your audience might include: it's free, it's convenient, it improves health, it's
the law, it saves time, or it saves money. When educating homeowners about wasting water through
leaky toilets, mention the dollar amounts the consumer pays per day for a leaky toilet in addition to
the fact that it depletes natural resources.
Block 4. Prepare Your Formats.
How are you going to display your message? To achieve maximum impact, several different formats
should be used. Formats include print materials such as fact sheets, newsletters, flyers, and posters;
promotional items such as magnets, bumper stickers, rulers, and tote bags; and media outlets such as
radio and TV public service announcements, and news stories.
To help determine your format, decide what you want your audience to do with the message. Are
they to read it once and then throw it away? Then a flyer produced on recycled paper might be the
way to go. For messages that you want your audience to refer to repeatedly, refridgerator magnets
-------
are an inexpensive format that keeps a message visible. Promotional items, which can be given away
at events and festivals, spread your message and increase recognition of your organization's name.
Radio and TV public service announcements are useful formats to announce upcoming events or the
release of an important environmental report. Use these outlets sparingly, making sure your messages
are time-sensitive and will appeal to a large audience.
Block 5. Identify Distribution Mechanisms.
Often the flyer or fact sheet has been printed before anyone asks, "How are we going to get this to
our target audience?" It is important to know the distribution mechanism for your message before
you develop any outreach materials. This mechanism will affect your budget planning (postage costs
add up), the design of your format, and the selection of trade associations or organizations to be used
in disseminating the message.
Possible distribution mechanisms include mail, trade associations, community organizations, door-to-
door dissemination, phone calls, events, mass transit, billboards, and media outlets.
Phone directories for the United States are now available on CD ROM that allow you to target your
audience by ZIP code, as well as through a variety of coded trade associations.
Block 6. Develop and Conduct Your Evaluation.
How do you know if your outreach effort worked or, more importantly, didn't work? It is critical to
assess your efforts and to evaluate specific components to improve or modify your future outreach
efforts. Review your objective and turn it into a question. If your objective was to recruit new
members for your volunteer monitoring organization, your question would be "Did we recruit new
members for our organization?" Then, if the answer is yes, you can make your evaluation more
specific:
How many new members did we recruit?
Were the new members from our target audience?
Did the target audience see our message?
Did the target audience understand our message?
Once you know the questions to ask, select the techniques that will provide the answers. Phone
surveys and questionnaires are commonly used to solicit information from the target audience.
By using these building blocks you can build a pathway to successful outreach in your watershed!
Eye-Catching Outreach Materials
Once you have chosen your formats to get your message out, how can you maximize the chance that
your target audience will see and respond to your message? Through the use of design, graphics,
photographs, hooks, and text, you can easily and cost-effectively enhance your materials to grab
people's attention.
Design
When designing your outreach materials, use restraint. There are lots of creative ideas out there, but
select only two or three elements to use on a piece. The use of white space will greatly enhance the
overall look. Think of white space as a graphic in and of itself. Fonts are increasingly used as
design elements in addition to text. Fonts can be stretched, wrapped, reversed, enlarged, turned
-------
sideways, or repeated to create visually appealing materials. When designing pieces, try to adhere to
the 2/3 vs. 1/3 rule: fill 2/3 of your page with graphics and only 1/3 of the page with text.
Graphics
Graphics should be used whenever possible to highlight concepts, break up blocks of text, and create
areas of white space. Make your graphics large enough to have impact. When using graphics, be
sure they photocopy well. Line drawings work best. If you have a limited graphics library, repeat
the same graphic across the page or vary the size of the graphic and group them together. Be careful
about using several different graphics of the same size on a page. This diminishes the impact of all
of the graphics on the page.
Photographs
Photographs can be incorporated into outreach materials, but make sure that each photograph will
reproduce well and is relevant to the piece. It is much better to use a clear line drawing than to use a
fuzzy, washed-out photo. Photos of people are usually best. Most people love reading about other
people. Again, if your material will be photocopied, photographs might not be your best choice.
Color
Use color. At the very least use colored paper for your fact sheets and flyers. You are competing
with lots of printed information out there and color gets you noticed. Paper has come a long way in
terms of the available recycled paper choices as well as colors that photocopy well. If you are
planning to print a flyer or brochure in black ink, for a small additional charge you can print in a
colored ink. Blue, purple, and green work best for pieces with a large amount of text. Two-color
printing provides a good balance of artistic creativity at a reasonable cost. By overlapping the two
colors you can create a third color, and the use of screens and halftones provides various shades of
color. Four-color printing is the most expensive color process, but it can also be the most eye-
catching. Four-color printing is particularly effective on maps and posters.
Hooks
Several techniques can be used to engage readers if your message is lengthy and you want to "hook"
them in. To involve the reader, try starting off with a startling question such as "Are you poisoning
your water?" Humor works well too. Most people enjoy games, so instead of explaining the
information, display it as a game or contest. For example, phrase your information in the form of
true/false questions, have the reader find 10 examples of pollution in an illustration, or design a
crossword puzzle with nonpoint source pollution clues.
Text
Many people spend a great deal of time preparing graphics and producing an award-winning layout
only to plop in text that is wordy and uninteresting. Spend time making your text come alive to your
readers. Once the text is written, take the time to shorten it. Avoid the use of acronyms and highly
technical words.
Using the News Media
News media coverage of water quality monitoring or remediation projects provides an inexpensive
venue for informing and educating the public on problem issues and the management and behavioral
practices recommended to resolve them.
-------
Unfortunately, much of the current media coverage of water quality projects involves a heavy focus
on peripheral matters (personalities, events, etc.) and little explanation of specific problems, the
science behind the problems, and strategies to address the problems. For instance, a story on the
installation of a livestock waste-handling system usually discusses the producer, his operation, his
family, and so forth, with little information on how the nutrients and pathogens in manure affect
surface and subsurface water supplies, or how the new system will help the situation.
Keeping the public informed on these issues through the news media is relatively simple. Only two
things are required. First and foremost, developing a relationship with the appropriate reporter(s)
will help foster an understanding of your monitoring group, its objectives, and the problems revealed
by the data collected in the field: Second, keep in mind that the news always has to be new.
Educational information on water quality issues must be accompanied by some sort of "news nugget"
that is current, affects many people, involves an interesting local personality, has unique appeal, or
relates the local situation to regional, state, or national issues.
The general format for these educational news releases is the "news nugget" (think of what the
headline will saythat's the news part), followed by an explanation of how the nugget affects water
quality. For example, a story on a new oil recycling program at a local service station could be
followed by a discussion on the toxic content of used motor oil, the fact that many people are still
disposing of oil improperly, a review of the pathways dumped oil takes to water bodies, and the
impact on aquatic life (and drinking water sources) that follows.
Develop a relationship with reporters. Taking them out on monitoring trips, for example, and
providing a steady stream of timely news releases will add to your organization's credibility, improve
public understanding of water quality issues, provide a boost for the troops in the field, and aid in
volunteer recruitment.
When you discuss scientific issues in news releases, it is very important not to get too technical.
"Phytoplankton" are "algae" to the general public; "nutrients" are "algae-feeding substances"; and
"nonpoint source" should be referred to as "runoff." Remember that reporters are usually juggling
four or five stories at once, so don't load them down with a lot of reports or reams of data. They
won't read more than two or three pages, so the object is to condense and simplify your message. It
helps to hit the various problems (nutrient loading, sedimentation, streambank destruction, etc.) from
several different angles throughout the year because reach x frequency = results. You can't tell them
just once that riparian vegetation is a good thing, just as soda pop companies don't ask you only once
to by their products. Promoting clean water in the news media is an ongoing affair...
-------
Nonpoint Pointers
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004A
March 1996
<&EPA Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
Nonpoint Source
Pollution: The
Nation's Largest
Water Quality Problem
Why is there still water that's too dirty for swimming, fishing, or drink-
ing? Why are native species of plants and animals disappearing from many
rivers, lakes, and coastal waters?
The United States has made tremendous advances in the past 25 years to
clean up the aquatic environment by controlling pollution from industries
and sewage treatment plants. Unfortunately, we did not do enough to
control pollution from diffuse, or nonpoint, sources. Today, nonpoint source
(NFS) pollution remains the Nation's largest source of water quality prob-
lems. It's the main reason that approximately 40 percent of surveyed rivers,
lakes, and estuaries are not clean enough to meet basic uses such as fishing
or swimming.
NPS pollution occurs when rainfall, snowmelt, or irrigation runs over
land or through the ground, picks up pollutants, and deposits them into
rivers, lakes, and coastal waters or introduces them into ground water.
Imagine the path taken by a drop of rain from the time it hits the
_^__^______^-_____ ground to when it reaches a river,
The most common NFS pollu-
tants are soils and nutrients
that wash into water bodies
from agricultural land,
construction sites, and other
areas of disturbance.
ground water, or the ocean. Any
pollutant it picks up on its journey
can become part of the NFS
problem. NFS pollution also
includes adverse changes to the
vegetation, shape, and flow of
streams and other aquatic systems.
NFS pollution is widespread
^^^ because it can occur any time
activities disturb the land or water. Agriculture, forestry, grazing, septic
systems, recreational boating, urban runoff, construction, physical changes
to stream channels, and habitat degradation are potential sources of NFS
pollution. Careless or uninformed household management also contributes
to NFS pollution problems.
The latest National Water Quality Inventory indicates that agriculture
is the leading contributor to water quality impairments, degrading 60
percent of the impaired river miles and half of the impaired lake acreage
surveyed by states, territories, and tribes. Runoff from urban areas is the
largest source of water quality impairments to surveyed estuaries (areas
near the coast where seawater mixes with freshwater).
series
of fact sheets
on nonpoint
source (NPS) pollution
Three Leading Sources of
Water Quality impairment
Rank
Rivers
Agriculture
Municipal
point
sources
Stream/
habitat
changes
Lakes
Agriculture
Municipal
point
sources
Urban runoff
Estuaries
Urban runoff
Municipal
point
sources
Agriculture
", Source: Natfamd Water QoaBty Inventory, 1994;";
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
EPA Journal, Vol: 17, No. 5,"
Nov/Dec1991,(EPA-22K-
1005)
Managing Nonpoint Source
Pollution: Final Report to
Congress on Section 319 of
the Clean Water Act (EPA-
506/9-90)
NPS News-Notes (EPA-841 -
N-92-003)
Polluted (EPA-841-F-94-
005)
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
The Watershed Protection
Approach (EPA-503/9-92/
002)
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
Schematic of a Watershed
The most common NPS pollutants are sediment and nutrients. These
wash into water bodies from agricultural land, small and medium-sized
animal feeding operations, construction sites, and other areas of distur-
bance. Other common NPS pollutants include pesticides, pathogens (bacte-
ria and viruses), salts, oil, grease, toxic chemicals, and heavy metals. Beach
closures, destroyed habitat, unsafe drinking water, fish kills, and many
other severe environmental and human health problems result from NPS
pollutants. They also spoil the beauty of healthy, clean water habitats. Each
year the United States spends millions of dollars to restore and protect i
areas damaged by NPS pollutants.
Progress
During the last 10 years, our country has made significant headway in
addressing NPS pollution. At the federal level, the Nonpoint Source Man-
agement Program was established by the 1987 Clean Water Act Amend-
ments, and the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Program was established by the
1990 Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments. Other recent federal
programs, as well as state, territorial, tribal and local programs also tackle
NPS problems.
In addition, public and private groups have developed and used pollu-
tion prevention and reduction initiatives and NPS pollution controls, known
as management measures, to clean up our water efficiently. Water quality
monitoring and environmental education supported by government agen-
cies, tribes, industry, volunteer groups, and schools have provided informa-
tion about NPS pollution and have helped to determine the effectiveness of
management techniques.
The watershed approach has also helped communities. It looks not
only at a water body but also the entire area that drains into it. This allows
communities to focus resources on a watershed's most serious environmen-
tal problemswhich, in many instances are caused by NFS pollution.
Just as important, more citizens are practicing water conservation
and participating in stream walks, beach cleanups, and other environment
activities sponsored by community-based organizations. In doing so,
citizens address the Nation's largest water quality problem, and ensure that
even more of our rivers, lakes, and coastal waters become safe for swim-
ming, fishing, drinking, and aquatic life.
-------
United States .
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004B
March 1996
Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
Opportunities for
Public Involvement in
Nonpoint Source Control
Over the last 25 years, communities have played an important role in
addressing nonpoint source (NFS) pollution, the Nation's leading source of
water quality problems. When coordinated with federal, state, and local
environmental programs and initiatives, community-based NFS control
efforts can be highly successful. To learn about and help control NFS pollu-
tion, contact the community-based organizations and environmental agen-
cies in your area. These groups often have information about how citizens
can participate in the following NFS control activities.
Volunteer Monitoring
Local groups organize volunteers of all skill levels to gather water
quality data. This information can help government agencies understand
the magnitude of NFS pollution. More than 500 active volunteer
monitoring groups currently operate throughout the United States.
Monitoring groups may also have
""^~^"~~'^~~^~"-^^ information about other NFS
pollution projects, such as beach
cleanups, stream walks, and
restoration activities.
When coordinated with federal,
state, and local environmental
programs and initiatives,
community-based NFS control
efforts can be highly successful.
Ecological Restoration
Ecological restoration provides
^^_ opportunities for the public to help
out with a wide variety of projects,
such as tree planting and bank stabilization in both urban and rural areas.
Restoration efforts focus on degraded waters or habitats that have signifi-
cant economic or ecological value.
Educational Activities
Teachers can integrate NFS pollution curricula into their classroom
activities. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), federal and
state agencies, private groups, and nonprofit organizations offer teachers a
wide variety of materials. Students can start on an NFS control project in the
primary grades and pursue their work through intermediate and secondary
levels.
Did you know
that volunteers
often collect
information on the
health of water-
ways and the
extent ofNPS
pollution?
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Clean Water in Your Water--
shed, Terrene Institute,
Washington, DC, 1993
Cleaner Water Through
Conservation (EPA-841-B-
95-002)
Compendium of Educational
Materials on the Water
Environment, Alliance for
Environmental Ed., Inc.,
Marshall, VA, 1992
EPA Journal, Vol. 17, No. 5,
Nov/Dec1991,(EPA-22k-
1005)
Environmental Resource
Guide, Nonpoint Source
Pollution Prevention, Air &
Waste Management Assoc.,
Pittsburgh, PA
Handle With Care, Terrene
Institute, Washington, DC,
1991
National Directory of Volun-
teer Environmental Monitor-
ing Programs (EPA-841-B-
94-001)
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-
95-004)
Xeriscape Landscaping
(EPA-840-B-93-001)
To order any of the above EPA
documents, call or fax the .
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
Water Conservation
Using technologies that limit water use in the bathroom, kitchen, laundry
room, lawn, driveway, and garden can reduce the demand on existing w
supplies and limit the amount of water runoff. More than 40 states now
have some type of water, conservation program to help citizens and busi-
nesses implement conservation practices. Government agencies, utilities,
and hardware stores have information about products that help households
conserve water.
Household Management
Learning to limit NFS pollution at the household level can reduce the
overall impact of NFS pollution on water quality. Households, for example,
can irrigate during cooler hours of the day, limit fertilizer applications to
lawns and gardens, and properly store chemicals to reduce runoff and keep
it dean. Chemicals and oil should not be poured into sewers. Pet wastes, a
-significant source of nutrient contamination, should be disposed of properly.
Households can also replace impervious surfaces with more porous materi-
als.
Public Meetings and Hearings
Decisions made during public hearings on stormwater permitting and
town planning can determine a community's capability to manage NFS
pollution over the long term. Laws or regulations may require federal, state,
or local agencies to hold public hearings when permits are issued or when
town plans are formed. Notices about hearings often appear in the newspa-
per or in government office buildings.
Community Organizations
Many communities have formed groups to protect local natural re-
sources. These community-based groups provide citizens with information
about upcoming environmental events in their watershed, such as ecologi-
cal restoration, volunteer monitoring, and public meetings. Watershed-level
associations are particularly effective at addressing a wide range of NFS
pollution problems.
Environmental Information on the Internet
Citizens can obtain a great deal of environmental data and educational
material through a computer linked to the World Wide Web. EPA's site
(http://www.epa.gov) on the Web provides up-to-date information on
Agency activities and enables citizens to find out about air and water
quality data in specific communities.
EPA supports NPSINFO, a forum for discussion of NFS issues, including
NFS education. Citizens with access to e-mail can subscribe to NPSINFO
free-of-charge by sending an e-mail message to:
listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
and include in the body of the message:
subscribe NPSINFO (your first name) (your last name)
Other federal, state, tribal, and local agencies, as well as businesses anolB
nonprofit groups, also provide environmental information on the World
Wide Web.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004C
March 1996
&EPA Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
Programs for Nonpoint
Source Control
States, territories, and tribes identify nonpoint source (NPS) pollution as
responsible for more than half of the Nation's existing and threatened water
quality impairments. To address these water quality problems, federal, state,
tribal, territorial, and local governments provide technical assistance and
fund programs to implement NPS controls. Other sources of funding are
also available. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental
Financing Information Network Center in Washington, DC (202/260-1020)
can provide communities with specific information on how to design and
fund the most appropriate NPS pollution strategy.
Federal Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
EPA administers section 319 of the Clean Water Act, also known as the
Nonpoint Source Management Program. Under section 319, states, territo-
ries, and tribes apply for and receive grants from EPA to implement NPS
pollution controls. As of 1995, EPA had awarded more than $370 million
under section 319 to address NPS pollution problems.
EPA administers other sections
^-^^ 0ฃ t^g clean Water Act to help
states, territories, and tribes to
plan for and implement water
pollution programs, which can
include measures for NPS control.
Government agencies provide
technical assistance and fund
programs to implement NFS
controls.
These include section 104(b)(3),
__^__^_____^_^_^^_ Water Quality Cooperative Agree-
ments; section 104(g), Small
Community Outreach; section 106, Grants for Pollution Control Programs;
section 314, Clean Lakes Program; section 320, National Estuary Program;
and section 604(b), Water Quality Management Planning. Together with the
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, EPA helps administer
section 6217 of the 1990 Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments, a
program that tackles nonpoint source pollution affecting coastal waters.
series
of fact sheets
on nonpoint
source (NFS) pollution
V'?- Did you know
that communities
reiyon government
programsand
alternative sources
^fiundJngfiso6h as =
inventing in water
~~; T conserva fi on, to *
I ^eipcontroljNPS
i v( ? pollution?
,'-*,: fs~\ * -^ M X .., . ,
NFS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Clean Water in Your Water-
shed, Terrene Institute,
Washington, DC, 1993
The Clean Water State
Revolving Fund: Financing
America's Environmental
InfrastructureA Report to
Congress (EPA-832-R-95-
001)
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
State and Local Funding of
Nonpoint Source Control
Programs (EPA-841-R-92-
003)
A State and Local Govern-
ment Guide to Environmen-
tal Program Funding Alter-
natives (EPA-841-K-94-001)
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
EFIN Center (Telephone:
(202) 260-0420)
U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency
Nonpoint Source Control
Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA administers section 306 of the Coastal Zone Management Act that
provides funds for water pollution control projects, including NPS manage-
ment activities, in states with coastal zones. Together with the EPA, NOAA^
also helps administer section 6217 of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization^
Amendments. This requires the 29 states with approved Coastal Zone
" Management Programs to establish and implement Coastal Nonpoint
Pollution Control Programs.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USD A)
The USDA administers incentive-based conservation programs through
the Consolidated Farm Services Agency, the Natural Resources Conserva-
tion Service, and the U.S. Forest Service to help control NPS pollution from
agriculture, forestry, and urban sources.
U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration
Under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the
Federal Highway Administration developed erosion control guidelines for
federally funded construction projects on roads, highways, and bridges.
U.S. Department of the Interior
Within the U.S. Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Reclamation,
the Bureau of Land Management, and the Fish and Wildlife Service admin-
ister several programs to help states manage NPS pollution by providing
technical assistance and financial support. For example, the Fish and Wild-
life Service administers the Clean Vessel Act, which provides grants to
construct sewage pumpout stations at marinas.
Alternative Funding Sources
Some communities rely on a combination of alternative funding sources
to implement NPS controls. In 1994, EPA published A State and Local Govern-
ment Guide to Environmental Program Funding Alternatives. This brochure
gives examples of how states can use the Clean Water State Revolving Fund,
leases, grants, taxes, fees, and bonds to craft innovative and effective strate-
gies to generate funds for NPS controls. In addition, government agencies
can establish programs to encourage investments in water conservation
technologies.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004D
March 1996
Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
The National
Nonpoint Source
Management Program
The Clean Water Act of 1972 helped clean up of many of our country's
waters, often achieving dramatic improvements. Despite those successes,
approximately 36 percent of the Nation's surveyed river miles, 37 percent of
its surveyed lake acreage, and 37 percent of its surveyed estuarine square
miles are not safe for basic uses such as swimming or fishing.
States, territories, and tribes estimate that at least half of these impair-
ments, as well as significant ground water contamination, are caused by
nonpoint source (NFS) pollution, making it the Nation's leading
source of water quality problems. To address these problems,
Since EPA began awarding
section 319 grants to implement
management programs, recipi-
ents have directed approximately
one-third of the funds toward
controlling agricultural NPS
pollution.
Congress amended the Clean
Water Act in 1987. Congress
established the NPS Pollution
Management Program under
section 319 of the amendments.
The program provides states,
territories, and tribes with grants
to implement NPS pollution
controls described in approved
NPS pollution management
-^^ programs.
In 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began award-
ing grants to states, territories, and tribes with approved programs. By 1991,
all 50 states and the territories had received EPA approval; by 1995, 7 tribes
also had received approval. Since 1990, recipients of 319 grants have di-
rected approximately 40 percent of awarded funds toward controlling NPS
pollution from agricultural lands. In addition, nearly one-quarter of the
money was used for general assistance purposes, including funding for
outreach and technical assistance. Efforts to control runoff from urban
sources, septic systems, and construction also received significant funding
under section 319, as did projects to manage wetlands and NPS pollution
from forestry, habitat degradation, and changes to stream channels.
In 1991, EPA established the National Monitoring Program to evaluate
the effectiveness of NPS pollution control projects. Fourteen state-proposed
projects will be evaluated over a six to 10-year period. The findings from
this effort will help states, territories, and tribes develop more successful
NPS pollution controls in other watersheds.
series
of fact sheets
on nonpoint
source (NPS) pollution
Did you know
that at least 50%
of water quality
problems in the
U.S. result from
NPS pollution?
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Managing Nonpoint Source
Pollution: Final Report to
Congress on Section 319 of
the Clean Water Act (EPA-
506/9-90)
Nonpoint Source Water
Quality Contacts Directory,
Conservation Technology
Information Center, West
Lafayette, Indiana
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
Section 319 National
Monitoring Program Projects
(EPA-841-S-94-006)
Section 319 National
Monitoring Program: An
Overview, Water Quality
Group, North Carolina State
University, March 1995
Section 319 Success Stories
(EPA-841-S-94-004)
To order any EPA documents
call or fax the National Center
for Environmental Publications
and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
As of 1995, EPA had awarded states, territories, and tribes $370 million
under section 319 to implement NPS pollution control. Section 319 Success
Stories provides examples of how states, territories, and tribes chose to useM
section 319 funds. ^
How Section 319 Works
Assessment Reports
All states, territories, and some tribes have met two basic requirements to
be eligible for a section 319 grant, the first of which is to develop and gain
EPA approval of a NFS pollution assessment report. In the assessment
report, the state, territory, or tribe identifies waters impacted or threatened
by NPS pollution. They also describes the categories of NPS pollution, such
as agriculture, urban runoff, or forestry, that are causing water quality
problems.
Management Programs
To meet the second requirement a state, territory, or tribe must develop
and obtain EPA approval of a NPS pollution management program. This
program becomes the framework for controlling NPS pollution, given the
existing and potential water quality problems described in the NPS pollu-
tion assessment report. A well-developed management program supports
activities with the greatest potential to produce early, demonstrable water
quality results; assists in the building of long-term institutional capacity to
address NPS pollution problems; and encourages strong interagency coordi-
nation and ample opportunity for public involvement in the decision-
making process.
How to Get Involved
The addresses and telephone numbers of state and territory nonpoint
source officials are listed in the Nonpoint Source Water Quality Contacts
Directory. These individuals can inform citizens about section 319 program
activities in their home state or territory. They can also let citizens know
how to become involved in the periodic updates of section 319 NPS assess-
ments and NPS management programs.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004F
March 1996
<&EPA Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution.in your community
Managing Nonpoint
Source Pollution
from Agriculture
The United States has more than 330 million acres of agricultural land
that produce an abundant supply of low-cost, nutritious food, feed, and
fibre. American agriculture is noted worldwide for its high productivity,
quality, and efficiency in delivering goods to the consumer. However, when
improperly managed, agricultural activities can affect water quality.
The most recent National Water Quality Inventory reports that agricultural
nonpoint source (NFS) pollution is the leading source of water quality
impacts to surveyed rivers and lakes, the third largest source of impair-
ments to surveyed estuaries, and also a major contributor to ground
water contamination and wetlands degradation.
~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^~ Agricultural activities that
cause NFS pollution include
confined animal facilities, grazing,
plowing, pesticide spraying,
irrigation, fertilizing, planting, and
harvesting. The major agricultural
NFS pollutants that result from
these activities are sediment,
Agricultural activities that
cause NFS pollution can result
from confined animal facilities,
grazing, plowing, pesticide
spraying, irrigation, fertilizing,
planting, and harvesting.
nutrients, pathogens, pesticides,
and salts. Agricultural activities
also can damage habitat and stream channels. Impacts on surface water and
ground water can be minimized by properly managing activities that can
cause NFS pollution.
Numerous government programs are available to help people design and
pay for management approaches to prevent and control NFS pollution. For
example, over 40 percent of section 319 Clean Water Act grants were used to
control agricultural NFS pollution. Also, several U.S. Department of Agri-
culture and state-funded programs provide cost-share, technical assistance,
and economic incentives to implement NFS pollution management prac-
tices. Many people use their own resources to adopt technologies and
practices to limit water quality impacts.
Managing Sedimentation. Sedimentation occurs when wind or water
runoff carries soil particles from an area, such as a farm field, and transports
them to a water body, such as a stream or lake. Excessive sedimentation
clouds the water, which reduces the amount of sunlight reaching aquatic
Did you know
that NIPS pollution
from agriculture
( Is the leading
/;,;. source of
rf' impairments to
surveyed rivers
and lakes?
NFS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Agriculture and Wetlands: A
Compilation of Factsheets
(EPA-503/9-92-003)
Alternative Agriculture,
National Research Council,
National Academy Press,
Washington, DC 1989
Guidance Specifying
Management Measures for
Sources of Nonpoint Pollu-
tion in Coastal Waters,
Chapter 2 (EPA-840-B-92-
002)
Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, Vol. 45, No. 1,
Jan/Feb 1990 (EPA-841-N-
90-100)
Livestock Grazing on
Western Riparian Areas,
EPA Region 8, Denver, CO
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
Soil And Water Quality: An
Agenda for Agriculture,
National Research Council,
National Academy Press,
Washington, DC, 1993
USDA National Resources
Inventory, Natural Re-
sources Conservation
Service
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
plants; covers fish spawning areas and food supplies; and clogs the gills of
fish. In addition, other pollutants like phosphorus, pathogens, and heavy
metals are often attached to the soil particles and wind up in the water
bodies with the sediment. Farmers and ranchers can reduce erosion and
sedimentation 20 to 90 percent by applying management measures to
control the volume and flow rate of runoff water, keep the soil in place, and
reduce soil transport.
Managing Nutrients. Nutrients such as phosphorus, nitrogen, and
potassium in the form of fertilizers, manure, sludge, irrigation water, le-
gumes, and crop residues are applied to enhance production. When they are
applied in excess of plant needs, nutrients can wash into aquatic ecosystems
where they can cause excessive plant growth, which reduces swimming and
boating opportunities, creates a foul taste and odor in drinking water, and
kills fish. In drinking water, high concentrations of nitrate can cause
methemoglobinemia, a potentially fatal disease in infants also known as
"blue baby syndrome." Nutrient management plans can help maintain high
yields and save money on the use of fertilizers while reducing NFS pollu-
tion.
Managing Confined Animal Facilities. By confining animals to areas or
lots, farmers and ranchers can efficiently feed and maintain livestock. But
these confined areas become major sources of animal waste. Runoff from
poorly managed facilities can carry pathogens (bacteria and viruses),
nutrients, and oxygen-demanding substances that contaminate shellfishing
beds and other major water quality problems. Ground water can also be
contaminated by seepage. Discharges can be limited by storing and manag-
ing facility wastewater and runoff with an appropriate waste management
system.
Managing Irrigation. Inefficient irrigation can cause water quality
problems. In arid areas, for example, where rainwater does not carry resi-
dues deep into the soil, excessive irrigation can concentrate pesticides,
nutrients, disease-carrying microorganisms, and salts-all of which impact
water quality-in the top layer of soil. Farmers can control these effects by
improving water use efficiency. Actual crop needs can be measured with a
variety of equipment.
Managing Pesticides. Pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides are used to
kill pests and control the growth of weeds and fungi. These chemicals can
enter and contaminate water through direct application, runoff and wind
transport. They can kill fish and wildlife, poison food sources, and destroy
animal habitat. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques based on the
specific soils, climate, pest history, and crop for a particular field can limit
pesticide use and manage necessary applications to minimize pesticide
movement from the field.
Managing Livestock Grazing. Overgrazing exposes soils, increases
erosion, encourages invasion by undesirable plants, destroys fish habitat,
and reduces the filtration of sediment necessary for building streambanks,
wet meadows, and floodplains. To reduce the impacts of grazing on water
quality, farmers and ranchers can adjust grazing intensity, keep livestock out
of sensitive areas, provide alternative sources of water and shade, and
revegetate rangeland and pastureland.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004G
March 1996
&EPA Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in .your community
Managing
Urban Runoff
The most recent National Water Quality Inventory reports that runoff from
urban areas is the leading source of impairments to surveyed estuaries and
the third largest source of water quality impairments to surveyed lakes. In
addition, population and development trends indicate that by 2010 more
than half of the Nation will live in coastal towns and cities, some of which
will have tripled in population. Runoff from these areas will continue to
degrade coastal waters.
To protect surface water and ground water quality, urban development
and household activities must be guided by plans that limit runoff and
reduce pollutant loadings. Communities can address urban water quality
problems on both a local and watershed level and garner the institutional
support to help address urban runoff problems.
Nonporous urban landscapes
like roads, bridges, parking lots,
and buildings don't let runoff
slowly percolate into the
ground.
How Urban Areas Affect
Runoff
Increased Runoff. The porous
and varied terrain of natural
landscapes like forests, wetlands,
and grasslands trap rainwater and
snowmelt and allow it to filter
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^___ slowly into the ground. Runoff
reaches receiving waters gradu-
ally. In contrast, nonporous urban landscapes like roads, bridges, parking
lots, and buildings don't let runoff slowly percolate into the ground. Water
remains at the surface, accumulates, and runs off in large amounts. When
leaving the system and emptying into a stream, it erodes streambanks,
damages streamside vegetation, and widens stream channels. This will
result in lower water depths during non-storm periods, higher than normal
water levels during wet weather periods, increased sediment loads, and
higher water temperatures. Native fish and other aquatic life cannot survive
in urban streams severely impacted by urban runoff.
Increased Pollutant Loads. Urbanization also increases the variety and
amount of pollutants transported to receiving waters: sediment from devel-
opment and new construction; oil, grease, and toxic chemicals from vehicles;
: Did you know
1 tfiat because
of impervious
surfaces siicntis
J pavement and
rooftops, & typical
1 city block gen-
more runoff than
a woodland area
of tf?e same size?
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Controlling Nonpoint Source
Runoff From Roads, High-
ways, and Bridges (EPA-
841-F-95-008a)
Developing Successful
Runoff Control Programs for
Urbanized Areas (EPA-841 -
K-94-003)
Economic Benefits of Runoff
Controls (EPA-S-95-002)
Fundamentals of Urban
Runoff, Terrene Institute,
Washington, DC, 1994
Guidance Specifying
Management Measures for
Sources of Nonpoint Pollu-
tion in Coastal Waters,
Chapter 4 (EPA-840-B-92-
002)
Storm Water Fact Sheet
(EPA-933-F-94-006)
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http//www. epa. gov/owow/nps/
index.html
nutrients and pesticides from turf management and gardening; viruses and
bacteria from failing septic systems; road salts; and heavy metals. Sediments
and solids constitute the largest volume of pollutant loads to receiving
waters in urban areas.
When runoff enters storm drains, it carries many of these pollutants
it. In older cities, this polluted runoff is often released directly into the
without any-treatment. Increased pollutant loads can harm fish and wildlife
populations, kill native vegetation, foul drinking water supplies, and make
recreational areas unsafe.
Point and Nonpoint Distinctions
Two types of laws help control urban runoff: one focusing on urban point
sources and the other on urban nonpoint sources. Point sources are ad-
dressed by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit
program of the Clean Water Act, which regulates stormwater discharges.
Urban nonpoint sources are covered by nonpoint source management
programs developed by states, territories, and tribes under the Clean Water
Act. In states and territories with coastal zones, programs to protect coastal
waters from nonpoint source pollution also are required by section 6217 of
the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments.
Measures to Manage Urban Runoff
Plans for New Development. New developments should attempt to
maintain the volume of runoff at predevelopment levels by using structural
controls and pollution prevention strategies. Plans for the management of
runoff, sediment, toxics, and nutrients can establish guidelines to help
achieve both goals. Management plans are designed to protect sensitive
ecological areas, minimize land disturbances, and retain natural drainage >
and vegetation.
Plans for Existing Development. Controlling runoff from existing urban
areas tends to be expensive compared to managing runoff from new devel-
opments. However, existing urban areas can target their urban runoff
control projects to make them more economical. Runoff management plans
for existing areas can first identify priority pollutant reduction opportuni-
ties, then protect natural areas that help control runoff, and finally begin
ecological restoration and retrofit activities to dean up degraded water
bodies. Citizens can help prioritize clean-up strategies, volunteer for restora-
tion efforts, and help protect ecologically valuable areas.
Plans for On-site Disposal Systems. The control of nutrient and patho-
gen loadings to surface waters can begin with the proper design, installa-
tion, and operation of on-site disposal systems (OSDSs). These septic sys-
tems should be situated away from open waters and sensitive resources
such as wetlands and floodplains. They should also be inspected, pumped
out, and repaired at regular time intervals. Household maintenance of septic
systems can play a large role in preventing excessive system discharges.
Public Education. Schools can conduct education projects that teach
students how to prevent pollution and keep water clean. Education and
public outreach can target specific enterprises, such as service stations, that
have opportunities to control runoff on site. Many communities have
implemented storm-drain stenciling programs that discourage people from
dumping trash directly into storm sewer systems.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004H
March 1996
&EPA Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
Managing Nonpoint
Source Pollution
from Forestry
Nearly 500 million acres of forested lands are managed for the produc-
tion of timber in the United States. Although only a very small percentage of
this land is harvested each year, forestry activities can cause significant
water quality problems if improperly managed. The latest National Water
Quality Inventory reports that forestry contributes to approximately 9 per-
cent of the water quality problems in surveyed rivers and streams.
Sources of NFS pollution associated with forestry include removal of
streamside vegetation, road construction and use, timber harvesting, and
mechanical preparation for the planting of trees. Road construction
and road use are the primary sources of NPS pollution on f or-
___.^^___________ ested lands, contributing up to 90
percent of the total sediment from
forestry operations. Harvesting
trees in the area beside a stream
can elevate water temperature and
destabilize streambanks. These
changes can harm aquatic life by
limiting sources of food, shade,
Following properly designed
preharvest plans can result in
logging activities that are both
profitable and highly protective
of water quality.
and shelter.
Preharvest Planning: Opportunities to Prevent NPS Pollution
To limit water quality impacts caused by forestry, public and private
forest managers have developed site-specific forest management plans.
Following properly designed preharvest plans make logging both
profitable and highly protective of water quality. Such plans address the full
range of forestry activities that can cause NFS pollution. They clearly
identify the area to be harvested; locate special areas of protection, such as
wetlands and streamside vegetation; plan for the proper timing of forestry
activities; describe management measures for road layout, design, construc-
tion, and maintenance, as well as for harvesting methods and forest regen-
eration.
Public meetings held under the authority of federal and state laws
provide citizens with a good opportunity to comment on the development
of forest management plans.
Did you know
thai streamside
^wigeiatipn;prd-
^tects streams,ซ'
lakes, and other
NPS pollution
: caused by
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Evaluating the Effectiveness"
of Forestry Best Manage-
ment Practices in Meeting
Water Quality Goals or
Standards, USDA Forest
Service, Miscellaneous
Publication 1520, July 1994
Forest Resources of the
United States, 1992, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station, General
Technical Report RM-234
(Revised)
Guidance Specifying
Management Measures for
Sources of Nonpoint Pollu-
tion in Coastal Waters,
Chapter 3 (EPA-840-B-92-
002)
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
Summary of Current State
Nonpoint Source Control
Practices for Forestry (EPA-
841/S-93-001)
Water Quality Effects and
Nonpoint Source Control for
Forestry: An Annotated
Bibliography (EPA-841/B-
93-005)
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
Factors Considered in the Preharvest Plan
Surveying the Site. Preactivity surveys can help identify areas that might
need special protection or management during forestry operations. Sensi
landscapes usually have steep slopes, a greater potential for landslides,
sensitive rock formations, high, precipitation levels, snowpack, or special
ecological functions such as those provided by streamside vegetation.
Forestry activities occurring in these areas have a high potential of affecting
water quality.
Timing. Because most forestry activities disturb soil and contribute to
erosion and runoff, timing operations carefully can significantly reduce their
impact on water quality. Rainy seasons and fish migration and spawning
seasons, for example, should be avoided.
Establishing Streamside Management Areas (SMAs). Plans often restrict
forestry activities in vegetated areas near streams (also known as buffer
strips or riparian zones), thereby establishing special SMAs. The vegetation
in an SMA is highly beneficial to water quality and aquatic habitat. Vegeta-
tion in the SMA stabilizes streambanks, reduces runoff and nutrient levels in
runoff, and traps sediment generated from upslope activities before it
reaches surface waters. SMA vegetation moderates water temperature by
shading surface water and provides habitat for aquatic life. Large trees
provide shade while alive and provide aquatic habitat after they die and fall
into streams as large woody debris.
Managing Road Construction, Layout, Use, and Maintenance. Good
road location and design can greatly reduce the transport of sediment to
water bodies. Whenever possible, road systems should be designed to
minimize road length, road width, and the number of places where water
bodies are crossed. Roads should also follow the natural contours of the
land and be located away from steep gradients, landslide-prone areas, and
areas with poor drainage. Proper road maintenance and closure of un-
needed roads can help reduce NPS impacts from erosion over the long term.
Managing Timber Harvesting. Most detrimental effects of harvesting are
related to the access and movement of vehicles and machinery, and the
dragging and loading of trees or logs. These effects include soil disturbance,
soil compaction, and direct disturbance of stream channels. Poor harvesting
and transport techniques can raise sediment production 10 to 20 times and
disturb as much as 40 percent of the soil surface. In contrast, careful logging
disturbs as little as 8 percent of the soil surface.
Careful selection of equipment and methods for transporting logs can
significantly reduce the amount of soil disturbed and delivered to water
bodies. Stream channels should be protected from logging debris at all times
during harvesting operations.
Managing Replanting. Forests can be regenerated from either seed or
seedlings. Seeding usually requires that the soil surface be prepared before
planting. Seedlings can be directly planted with machines after minimal soil
preparation. In either case, the use of heavy machinery can result in signifi-
cant soil disturbance if not performed carefully.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office ol Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004J
March 1996
Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
Managing Nonpoint
Source Pollution
from Households
The well-known stories about environmental problems tend to focus on
big, recognizable targets such as smoking industrial facilities, leaking toxic
waste dumps, and messy oil spills. As a result, people often forget about
water pollution caused by smaller nonpoint sourcesespecially pollution at
the household level.
However, nonpoint source (NFS) pollution is the Nation's leading source
of water quality degradation. Although individual homes might contribute
only minor amounts of NFS pollution, the combined effect of an entire
neighborhood can be serious. These include eutrophication, sedi-
mentation, and contamination
with unwanted pollutants.
To prevent and control NFS
pollution, households can learn
about the causes of such pollution
and take the appropriate (and
often money-saving) steps to limit
runoff and make sure runoff stays
By preventing water from
percolating down into the
ground, paved surfaces cause
runoff to collect and funnel into
storm drains at high speeds,
which can result in severe
streambank erosion when it
reaches the receiving waters.
clean.
Limit Paved Surfaces
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Urban and suburban land-
scapes are covered by paved
surfaces like sidewalks, parking
lots, roads, and driveways. They prevent water from percolating down into
the ground, cause runoff to accumulate, and funnel into storm drains at
high speeds. When quickly flowing runoff empties into receiving waters, it
can severely erode streambanks. Paved surfaces also transfer heat to runoff,
thereby increasing the temperature of receiving waters. Native species of
fish and other aquatic life cannot survive in these warmer waters.
To limit NFS pollution from paved surfaces households can substitute
alternatives to areas traditionally covered by nonporous surfaces. Grasses
and natural ground cover, for example, can be attractive and practical
substitutes for asphalt driveways, walkways, and patios. Some homes
effectively incorporate a system of natural grasses, trees, and mulch to limit
Did youknpw
that homes
withxeriscape
landscapes use
natural contours
and native plants
toconservewa-
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Clean Water in Your Water-
shed, Terrene Institute,
Washington, DC, 1993
Cleaner Water Through
Conservation (EPA-841-B-
95-002)
Handle With Care, Terrene
Institute, Washington, DC,
1991
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994(EPA-841-S-95-
004)
Xeriscape Landscaping:
Preventing Pollution and
Using Resources Efficiently
(EPA-840-B-93-001)
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
continuous impervious surface area. Wooden decks, gravel or brick paths,
and rock gardens keep the natural ground cover intact and allow rainwater
to slowly seep into the ground.
Landscape With Nature
Altering the natural contours of yards during landscaping and planting
with non-native plants that need fertilizer and extra water can increase the
potential for higher runoff volumes, increase erosion, and introduce chemi-
cals into the path of runoff. In contrast, xeriscape landscaping provides
households with a framework that can dramatically reduce the potential for
NFS pollution.
Xeriscape incorporates many environmental factors into landscape
designsoil type, use of native plants, practical turf areas, proper irrigation,
mulches, and appropriate maintenance schedules. By using native plants
that are well-suited to a region's climate and pests, xeriscape drastically
reduces the need for irrigation and chemical applications. Less irrigation
results in less runoff, while less chemical application keeps runoff dean.
Proper Septic System Management
Malfunctioning or overflowing septic systems release bacteria and
nutrients into the water cycle, contaminating nearby lakes, streams, and
estuaries, and ground water. Septic systems must be built in the right place.
Trampling ground above the system compacts soil and can cause the
system's pipes to collapse. Also, septic systems should be located away from
trees because tree roots can crack pipes or obstruct the flow of wastewater
through drain lines. Proper septic system management is also important,
and a system should be inspected and emptied every 3 to 5 years. '
By maintaining water fixtures and by purchasing water-efficient
showerheads, faucets, and toilets, households can limit wastewater levels,
reducing the likelihood of septic system overflow. Most water conservation
technologies provide long-term economic and environmental benefits.
Proper Chemical Use, Storage, and Disposal
Household cleaners, grease, oil, plastics, and some food or paper prod-
ucts should not be flushed down drains or washed down the street. Over
time chemicals can corrode septic system pipes and might not be completely
removed during the filtration process. Chemicals poured down the drain
can also interfere with the chemical and biological breakdown of the wastes
in the septic tank.
On household lawns and gardens, homeowners can try natural alterna-
tives to chemical fertilizers and pesticides and apply no more than the
recommended amounts. Natural predators like insects and bats,
composting, and use of native plants can reduce or entirely negate the need
for chemicals. Xeriscape can limit chemical applications to lawns and
gardens.
If chemicals are needed around the home, they should be stored properly
to prevent leaks and access by children. Most cities have designated sites for
the proper disposal of used chemicals.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4503F)
EPA-841-F-96-004K
March 1996
&EPA Nonpoint Pointers
Understanding and managing nonpoint source pollution in your community
Managing Wetlands to
Control Nonpoint
Source Pollution
- u
Ax-. &%
States, territories, and tribes identify nonpoint source (NFS) pollution as
the Nation's leading source of surface water and ground water quality
impairments. When properly managed, wetlands can help prevent NPS
pollution from degrading water quality. Wetlands include swamps,
marshes, fens, and bogs.
Properly managed wetlands can intercept runoff and transform and store
NPS pollutants like sediment, nutrients, and certain heavy metals without
being degraded. In addition, wetlands vegetation can keep stream channels
intact by slowing runoff and by evenly distributing the energy in runoff.
Wetlands vegetation also regulates stream temperature by providing
streamside shading. Some cities have started to experiment with wet-
lands as an effective tool to control runoff and protect urban
streams.
Improper development or
excessive pollutant loads can
damage wetlands. The degraded
wetlands can no longer provide
water quality benefits and become
significant sources of NFS pollu-
tion. Excessive amounts of decay-
ing wetlands vegetation, for
^____^_^____^______^ example, can increase biochemical
oxygen demand, making habitat
unsuitable for fish and other aquatic life. Degraded wetlands also release
stored nutrients and other chemicals into surface water and ground water.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends three
management strategies to maintain the water quality benefits provided by
wetlands: preservation, restoration, and construction of engineered systems
that pretreat runoff before it reaches receiving waters and wetlands.
Wetlands Preservation
The first strategy protects the full range of wetlands functions by dis-
couraging development activity. At the same time, this strategy encourages
proper management of upstream watershed activities, such as agriculture,
forestry, and urban development. Several programs administered by EPA,
Properly managed wetlands can
intercept runoff and transform
and store NFS pollutants like
sediment, nutrients, and cer-
tain heavy metals without
being degraded.
series -*.
of fact sheets ซ
-f
on nonpoint
source (NPS) pollution
Did you know
that wetlands
receive significant
amounts of NPS
pollution because
they are typically
the lowest point
on the landscape?
NPS pollution occurs when
water runs over land or through
the ground, picks up pollutants,
and deposits them in surface
waters or introduces them into
ground water.
-------
RELATED PUBLICATIONS
Additional fact sheets in the
Nonpoint Pointers series
(EPA-841-F-96-004)
Guidance Specifying ~~ "
Management Measures for
Sources of Nonpoint Pollu-
tion in Coastal Waters,
Chapter 7 (EPA-840-B-92-
002)
The Quality of Our Nation's
Water: 1994 (EPA-841-S-95-
004)
To order any of the above EPA
documents call or fax the
National Center for Environmen-
tal Publications and Information.
Tel (513)489-8190
Fax (513)489-8695
To order the following EPA
documents, call EPA's Wetlands
Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
America's Wetlands (OPA-
87-016)
Constructed Wetlands for
Wastewater Treatment and
Wildlife Habitat (EPA-832-R-
93-005)
Natural Wetlands and Urban
Stormwater: Potential
Impacts and Management
(EPA-843-R-001)
Wetlands Fact Sheets (EPA-
843-F-95-001)
FOR MORE INFORMATION
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch
Washington DC 20460
Internet Address:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
index.html
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Department
of the Interior, as well as other government agencies, protect wetlands by
either controlling development activities that would affect wetlands or
providing financial assistance^ to people who wish to protect them. In
addition, nongovernmental groups that purchase wetlands for conservation
purposes, such as The Nature Conservancy, The Trust for Public Land, and
local land trusts, are playing an increasingly important role in protecting
water quality.
Wetlands/Riparian Restoration
The second strategy promotes the restoration of degraded wetlands and
riparian zones with NFS pollution control potential. Riparian zones are the
vegetated ecosystems along a water body through which energy, materials,
and water pass. Riparian areas characteristically have high water-tables and
are subject to periodic flooding and influence from the adjacent water body.
They encompass wetlands and uplands, or some combination of these two
landforms.
Restoration activities should recreate the full range of preexisting wet-
lands functions. That means replanting degraded wetlands with native
plant species and, depending on the location and the degree of degradation,
using structural devices to control water flows. Restoration projects factor in
ecological principles, such as habitat diversity and the connections between
different aquatic and riparian habitat types, which distinguish these kinds
of projects from wetlands that are constructed for runoff pretreatment.
Engineered Systems
The third strategy promotes the use of engineered vegetated treatment
systems (VTS). VTS are especially effective at removing suspended solids
and sediment from NFS pollution before the runoff reaches natural wet-
lands.
One type of VTS, the vegetated filter strip (VFS), is a swath of land
planted with grasses and trees that intercepts uniform sheet flows of runoff,
before the runoff reaches wetlands. VFSs are most effective at sediment
removal, with removal rates usually greater than 70%. Constructed wet-
lands, another type of VTS, are typically engineered complexes of water,
plants, and animal life that simulate naturally occurring wetlands. Studies
indicate that constructed wetlands can achieve sediment removal rates
greater than 90 percent. Like VFS, constructed wetlands offer an alternative
to other systems that are more structural in design.
Saving a Precious Resource
Healthy wetlands benefit fish, wildlife, and humans because they protect
many natural resources, only one of which is clean water. Unfortunately,
over half of the wetlands in the lower 48 states were lost between the late
1700s and the mid-1980s, and undisturbed wetlands still face threats from
development. To help prevent NFS pollution from further degrading the
Nation's waters and to protect many other natural resources, wetlands
protection must remain a focal point for national education campaigns,
watershed protection plans, and local conservation efforts.
-------
-------
|> ** b
\2ฃj
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Regional Indian Program Coordinators
EPA Region 1
Jim Sappier
Indian Coordinator
EPA Region I (PAG 2300)
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: (617) 565-3935
Fax: ' (617) 565-4940
EPA Region 2
Christine Yost
Indian Coordinator
EPA Region II (2PM-E1)
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007-1866
Phone: (212) 637-3564
Fax: (212) 637-3772
EPA Region 4
Mark Robertson
Acting, Indian Coordinator
EPA Region IV (9EAB-4)
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Phone: (404) 562-9639
Fax: (404) 562-9598
EPA Region 5
Casey Ambutas
Indian Coordinator
EPA Region V(5ME-19J)
77 W. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
Phone: (312) 353-1394
Fax: (312) 353-4135
EPA Region 6
Ernest Woods
Indian Coordinator
EPA Region VI (6E-FF)
1445 Ross Avenue
12th Floor, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone: (214) 665-7454
Fax: (214) 665-2118
EPA Region 7
Kim Olson
Indian Coordinator
EPA Region VII
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone: (913) 551-7539
Fax: (913) 551-7863
EPA Region 8
Sadie Hoskie
Tribal Manager
EPA Region VIII (80EA)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Phone: (303) 312-6343
Fax: (303) 312-6741
EPA Region 9
Clancy Tenley
Tribal Program Manager
EPA Region IX (E-4)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415) 744-1607
Fax: (415) 744-1604
EPA Region 10
Kathy Veit
Tribal Program Manager
EPA Region X
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 553-1983
Fax: (206) 553-6647
Kathy Hill
Tribal Policy Director
EPA Region X
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 553-6220
Fax: (206) 553-6647
-------
\ AIEO Responsibility by Function/Issue Area
Fax: (202) 260-7509
Director
Associate Director
Office Manager
SEE Employee
Policy/Legislation
Budget, General Assistance Grants
Human Resources, and Administration
Tribal Operations Committee Liasion
National and HDQTs, Indian WGs
Office of Water
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Resources
Office of Air
Office of Research and Development
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances
Office of General Counsel
Office of Federal Activities (NEPA)
Office of Policy, Plan, and Evaluation
Office of Environmental Justice
Data/Reporting and Senior
Environmental Employee Program
Education/Training
Communication/Outreach
(Newsletter)
Internet)
Terry Williams
Tom Wall
Theresa Fleming
Barbara Leftwich
Tom Wall
Elizabeth Bell
Meghan Kelly
Caren Rothstein
Raymond Hall
Elizabeth Smith
Caren Rothstein
Clara Mickles
Marlene Regelski
Clara Mickles
Elizabeth Bell
Marlene Regelski
Caren Rothstein
Elizabeth Bell
Meghan Kelly
Elizabeth Bell
Clara Mickles
Elizabeth Bell
Marlene Regelski
Elizabeth Bell
Clara Mickles
Caren Rothstein, Bob Smith
Marlene Regelski
Marlene Regelski
Elizabeth Smith
Caren Rothstein
(202) 260-7939
(202) 260-7939
(202) 260-3986
(202) 260-7939
(202) 260-7939
(202) 260-8106
(202) 260-1008
(202) 260-9872
(202) 260-9304
(202) 260-4609
(202) 260-9872
(202) 2607519
(202) 260-7284
(202) 260-7519
(202) 260-8106
(202) 260-7284
(202) 260-9872
(202) 260-8106
(202) 260-1008
(202) 260-8106
(202) 260-7519
(202) 260-8106
(202) 260-7284
(202) 260-8106
(202) 260-7519
(202) 260-9872, 8202
(202) 260-7284
(202) 260-7284
(202) 260-4609
(202) 260-9872
Inter-Agency Coordination
Performance Partnerships
Tribal Atlas Project
Tom Wall, Elizabeth Bell
Meghan Kelly, Marlene Regelski
Elizabeth Bell, Bob Smith
Jori Wesley
(202) 260-7939, 8106
(202) 260-1008, 7284
(202) 260-8106, 8202
(202) 260-1905
-------
Insert
Clean Water and Productive Rangelandi
Here
-------
Insert
Keep Our Western Waters Clean
Here
-------
Insert
Managing Change: Livestock Grazing on
Western Riparian Areas
Hi
------- |