-------
AGRICULTURAL NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROL STRATEGY
Under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act, nonpoint source control
programs are to be developed where needed by State and areawide planning
agencies, and the programs implemented by designated management agencies.
The States of Region VIII have recognized a need for effective control
programs for agricultural sources of water pollution, but have experienced
varying degrees of uncertainty as to the direction such a program should
take. The strategy presented here is intended as a framework for
developing effective State agricultural nonpoint source control programs,
and as such, provides general guidance from EPA's perspective.
In addition to providing a framework for development of effective
State programs, the strategy provides internal consistency for EPA funding
decisions, development of State/EPA Agreements, and other ongoing functional
tasks. Since the strategy is based upon an assessment of present-day
agricultural nonpoint source programs, periodic updates will be needed to
bring the strategy in line with changing conditions. We thank those who
commented on earlier drafts of the strategy, and hope that through
continued discussions and work, effective nonpoint source programs can be
developed that meet the special needs of each State.
David Standley
Director
Water Division
-------
Agricultural Nonpoint Source Control Strategy
EPA Region VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction 1
II. State Agricultural Nonpoint Implementation Program Assessment
and Needs:
Colorado 8
Montana 11
North Dakota 13
South Dakota 16
Utah 18
.Wyoming 21
III. Region VIII Agricultural Nonpoint Implementation
Program Needs 24
-------
I. Introduction
The purpose of this Agricultural Nonpoint Source Control Strategy is to
assess ongoing EPA and State agricultural control programs, and to focus on
specific actions needed to make the programs more fully effective. Ten
essential components of an effective state program are presented. Each State
program is then described in terms of these ten essential components. Based
on this assessment, specific actions are identified that address program
deficiencies, and milestones are suggested. These milestones are advisory
only, but coincide largely with existing State/EPA Agreements, work plans, and
the timeline for FY 82 "208" funding activities. The strategy is intended as
a framework for agricultural nonpoint source program development, so that EPA,
State Water Quality Agencies, and agricultural implementation management
agencies have a more common point of reference. Very helpful comments and
suggestions were received from these agencies which have been incorporated
into this final strategy.
The scope of this strategy is more limited than the title might suggest.
It addresses primarily programs which are designed to encourage implementation
of Best Management Practices on private agricultural land. Region VIII also
has large areas of publicly-owned rangeland, most of it administered by the
Bureau of Land Management or the USDA Forest Service. Rangeland management is
of vital concern from a water quality standpoint, but the control program and
management agencies are considerably different from those described herein, so
a separate rangeland strategy will be prepared by EPA Region VIII. Agricul-
ture on Indian land is another special case. Some tribal lands will be
included in the statewide programs, while other tribes are developing their
own agricultural nonpoint control programs. These tribal programs are not
assessed in this strategy because they are in the earliest stages of program
development.
From a land use standpoint, EPA Region VIII is overwhelmingly rural and
agricultural. There are serious point source problems, particularly with
substandard waste treatment plants, but more lakes and stream miles are
adversely affected by nonpoint pollution than by point sources. Agricultural
practices have been shown to accelerate or contribute to problems with
salinity, nutrients, and sedimentation in a number of areas. The effects may
be localized, as with eutrophication and sedimentation of small lakes in South
Dakota, or they may be regional in effect, as with increasing salinity in the
Colorado River system. Quantitative figures on agricultural contributions to
water quality problems are available only in a few intensively studied areas.
Monitoring networks have generally been designed with point sources in mind,
so that most of the initial Water Quality Management Plans were forced into a
more qualitative assessment of agricultural nonpoint pollution. Even so, it
is clear from information now available that the goals of the Clean Water Act
cannot be met in many areas of Region VIII unless certain serious agricultural
nonpoint sources of pollution are controlled.
-1-
-------
Ten essential components of a self-sustaining effective state agricul-
tural nonpoint source control program are identified in Table 1. ' These
criteria provide a framework against which the status of the agricultural
nonpoint effort can be assessed and program needs evaluated. Table 1 includes
a Region-wide assessment of the ten program components, while Section II
includes a more detailed assessment on a state-by-state basis.
One of the first essential steps in effective program development is
problem identification and prioritization of problem areas. Given the
state-of-the-art in agricultural nonpoint source identification, a highly
quantitative problem assessment may not be possible statewide. Some states
have supplemented water quality monitoring data with expert opinion from a
committee of agricultural experts. Most of the states in Region VIII have
identified some problem watersheds. Several of the states have gone on to
prioritize these watersheds. Due to limited implementation resources and the
need to concentrate our efforts in the most cost-effective areas, geographical
prioritization of problem watersheds is necessary. While areawide planning
agencies may prioritize their problem watersheds, a statewide prioritization
is absolutely necessary. This process must go beyond an ad hoc arrangement
for identifying implementation project areas for the RuraT~CTean Water
Program, Special ACP program, or other such programs. There are practically a
limitless number of projects that could be proposed which would have some
incremental effect on water quality. The following criteria are suggested for
prioritizing agricultural nonpoint problem areas:
1. Severity of the water quality impact and degree of water use
impairment?In some cases, such as salinity, the costs of each added
increment of pollution can be quantified in dollar terms. Often only
relative indices or professional judgements will be available.
2. Technical effectiveness of available BMP's. Given that an
agricultural problem has been identified, are there any Best
Management Practices available that would make a significant impact
on the problem?
3. Relative cost-effectiveness of BMP's. Technically, cost-
effectiveness is expressed as dollars spent per increment improvement
in some water quality parameter. Practically speaking, such figures
are seldom available, so some relative estimates of
cost-effectiveness are used.
4. Public and landowner support in the area. The degree of local
enthusiasm and support is an important consideration, but should not
be an overrriding one.
-2-
-------
TABLE 1: ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
Component Status Region-wide
1. Geographical prioritization of pro-
blem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagories has
been assigned to designated management
agencies.
3. Management agenies responsible for
implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject
matter to be controlled.
— adequate staff and budget.
—relevant authorities to administer
a regulatory or non-regulatory
program, depending on how de-
signated, and
—commitment by designated agency.
4. Identification of Best Management
Practices (statewide general BMP's and
more specific in priority problem
areas).
5. Provisions for adequate technical
and financial assistance to implement
the control program. Might include
stata cost-sharing, improved District
funding, tax incentives, and/or others.
6. Provisions for an effective
educational program to inform and
involve the affectd publics (statewide
and priority watershed level). This
includes:
—public participation in water quality
management planning and implemen-
tation project planning.
—educational programs on BMP's.
Most states have identified problem
watersheds, but have not prioritized
them, statewide.
Yes, in all states Conservation
Districts have been designated either
as management agencies or as
operational implementation agencies.
Conservation Districts are well-suited
as management agencies, except that
their staffs and budgets are minimal,
making them heavily dependent upon
limited federal SCS technical
assistance programs.
Site-specific BMP's are developed in
early stages of funded implementation
projects. Statewide BMP lists, in
states were attempted, tend to be of
limited utility, due to generalization.
All six states are heavily dependent
upon limited federal cost-share and
technical assistance programs for
nonpoint implementation. South Dakota
has a limited state cost-share program.
Public participation in water quality
management planning and project
planning is generally adequate or
meets procedural requirements. BMP
education programs are usually
developed in conjunction with funded
implementation projects. Statewide
BMP education programs through
Cooperative Extension Service have
been started only in North and South
Dakota thus far.
-3-
-------
(TABLE 1: CONTINUED)
Component
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and inspection on prioirty
projects.
8. Consideration of regulatory
alternatives in water quality
management planning.
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for implementation to
address program deficiencies and
priority watershed implementation.
10. Agreement on
fat least annual)
mplamentation.
a reporting system
on progress made in
Status Region-wide
Monitoring responsibilities are clear
in funded project areas. Procedures
for monitoring and inspection of
priority areas needs to be clearly
defined and future monitoring planned
for.
Animal wastes are treated as point
sources in the NPDES where signifi-
cant. Lewis and Clark Conservation
District in Montana has a regulatory
erosion and sediment ordinance which
will be evaluated. In South Dakota, a
statewide Sediment and Erosion Control
Act was passed in 1976, and regulatory
guidelines published in July 1977.
Many 208 Plans give only passing
consideration to regulatory
alternatives.
Milestones found in State/EPA Agree-
ments and 208 work plans tend to be
limited to 208 program management
needs.
There are a number of reporting
requirements associated with Section
208 program grants, but these tend not
to track on-the-ground implementation
efforts and results. No Regional
implementation reporting system is yet
in place.
-4-
-------
Our ability to document water quality problems and improvements from
application of BMP's, and our ability to predict BMP's technical and
cost-effectiveness should improve as experience is gained in the nonpoint
source control program. A conscious effort must be made not only to
incoporate this newly-developing information into the planning process, but to
make better use of the information already available in the 208 Plans, water
quality monitoring data, and from the variety of persons who have knowledge of
local conditions. Implementation priorities should be reviewed at least
annually, as new information comes to light.
Management agencies for agriculture have been designated in all the
states; either Conservation Districts, the State Conservation Commission, or
counties that will in turn depend upon Conservation Districts for actual
implementation. There is considerable variation within Region VIII as to
designation of agricultural management agencies and the role that they are
prepared to take. In all cases Conservation Districts are implementation
agencies at the local level, and in many ways they are well suited as
nonregulatory implementation agencies. They have access to technical
expertise, a high level of commitment, and the necessary authorities to
administer an effective voluntary nonpoint control program. The adequacy of
District staffs and budgets is a potential implementation program deficiency,
however. In Region VIII, most of the Districts are highly dependent upon the
Soil Conservation Service for nonclerical staffing needs, having few or no
District professional employees. Since SCS is operating under a very tight
budget and personnel ceiling, their ability to supply resources to special
water quality implementation project areas is quite limited. At present,
there are no clear mechanisms for increasing State/local support to
Conservation Districts for water quality purposes.
Most of the Water Quality Management (208) Plans of Region VIII
identified a large number of soil and water conservation practices as being
Agricultural Best Management Practices for water pollution control. These
conservation practices have been promoted by soil conservation districts for
many years, and are known to be effective for control of soil loss and
runoff. A practice that is effective in holding soil in place may not,
however, be effective in controlling movement of dissolved nutrients, salts,
or commonly used pesticides if they are only moderately adsorbed to soil
particles. Even where sediment is the only pollutant of concern, it is often
more cost-effective to control sediment delivery to the stream (through buffer
strips, detention basins, or selective treatment of croplands with the highest
sediment delivery to the stream) than to control soil erosion everywhere on
the watershed. Thus, a cost-effective agricultural nonpoint source control
program might include erosion control, but is not necessarily identical. Both
erosion control and water pollution control are vital environmental goals of
the Conservation Districts, and both need to be considered in District
planning and goal setting, but with a recognition that they are not always
synonymous.
-5-
-------
Both structural and nonstructural BMP's may be necessary to control the
full range of agricultural water pollutants. Nonstructural SMP's such as
integrated pest management, improved pesticide application and disposal,
nutrient management, and irrigation scheduling tend to be more difficult to
implement and maintain than structural improvements, but are the most
effective control measures for some pollutants. Under a system of voluntary
BMP adoption, demonstration and education efforts are essential to the
nonstructural BMP implementation program. The North Dakota and South Dakota
water quality agencies have contracted with the Cooperative Extension Service
to provide statewide BMP education services. In some other states, BMP
education has been handled by the Soil Conservation Districts as part of the
technical assistance package associated with structural BMP installation.
Each approach has certain advantages and strengths, so that a coordinated
effort that involved both Cooperative Extension and Conservation Districts
could be more effective than either alone.
At present, the nonpoint implementation programs in all six states of
Region VIII are heavily dependent upon limited federal cost-share and
technical assistance programs. Several implementation projects are underway,
using cost-share funds from the Agricultural Conservation Program (ACP), Rural
Clean Water Program (RCWP), Clean Lakes Program, and the Model Implementation
Program. The largest of these are Muddy Creek (Montana), Grand Valley
(Colorado), Uintah Basin (Utah), Snake Creek (Utah), and Lake Herman (South
Dakota). A number of other projects which rely heavily on federal funding
have been approved or are pending approval. Unfortunately, the identified
needs far exceed the federal implementation resources available to do the work.
South Dakota has undertaken a limited state cost-share program for
feedlot and lake improvement projects, but there is considerable apprehension
in the states about non-federal cost-sharing of BMP's. There are similar
apprehensions about increased non-federal support for Conservation District
programs. The agricultural community has traditionally relied on federal
funds and personnel to support this type of activity, so there has been very
little analysis of financial and institutional alternatives. Water Quality
Management Agencies concentrated initially on developing technical solutions
to water quality problems at the expense of developing the processes necessary
to actually implement the proposed programs and practices. While technically
sound, most Water Quality Management (208) Plans fail to address the financial
and institutional questions which figure so prominently in actually solving
problems, and also fail in establishing a self-sustaining continuing planning
process. The lack of adequate financial and institutional analysis makes it
difficult for local water quality management planners and decision-makers to
credibly demonstrate alternative costs and cost/benefit trade-offs. This in
turn makes it hard to obtain a local commitment to implement the completed
plan. A number of financial and institutional mechanisms for implementing an
agricultural nonpoint control program will be explored at the Regional
-6-
-------
Agricultural Nonpoint Implementation Workshop to be held by EPA and the
National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD) in December, 1980. At
that workshop, the states will have an opportunity to explore what other
states have done in the areas of state cost-sharing, improved Conservation
District funding, tax incentives and disincentives for landowners, etc.; and
to develop their own approach to overcoming some of the financial and
institutional barriers to nonpoint implementation.
The status of other essential components of a state agricultural nonpoint
source control program is summarized Region-wide in Table 1. Section II of
this strategy is a state-by-state assessment of the agricultural nonpoint
programs. Based on this assessment, specific actions are identified that
address program deficiencies, and milestones are suggested. Section III of
the strategy presents specific actions that need to be taken by EPA Region
VIII to bring about development of an effective agricultural nonpoint
implementation program.
-7-
-------
COLORADO
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
I
00
1. Geographical prioritlzatioa of
problem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagories has been
assigned to designated management agencies.
3. Management agencies responsible for
implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject
matter to be controlled.
—adequate staff and budget.
—relevant authorities.
—necessary commitment.
4. Identification of BMP's
Yea
Yes
The state Soil Conservation Board
is responsible for assisting and
coordinating areawide and local
planning, and for technical
assistance for agricultural
nonpolnt source control throughout
the state. Counties are the
designated management agencies
and have generally transferred
operational responsibilities to
local Conservation Districts.
Conservation District staffs and
budgets are minimal, and the
program is heavily dependent
upon federal cost-sharing and
technical assistance programs.
Yes, statewide and in funded
project areas.
Periodic review
January 1981
Develop management agency effectiveness in priority
problem areas'targeted'for maj6f implementation
activities:
Participate In EPA-NACD Agricultural Implementation
Workshop and prepare state strategy for development
of management agency effectiveness.
Evaluate major accomplishments as outlined in
above strategy.
December 1980
May 1981
Soil Conservation Board and Districts will develop
data on severity of problems, needs assessments,
and BMP recommendations on the following critical
agricultural areas: Little Thompson, Grand Valley,
Tongue Creek, Mancos Valley, Lower Four Mile Creek,
School House Canyon, and North Fork of Republican
River.
Fall 1981
-------
Colorado, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NPS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
vo
I
5. Provisions for adequate technical and
financial assistance to Implement the
control program.
6. Provisions for an effective educational
program to inform and involve the affected
publics (statewide and priority watershed
level).
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and inspection on priority
projects.
Program is heavily dependent upon
limited federal cost-sharing and
technical assistance programs.
Public participation is an ongoing
part of the "208" planning process,
but Is most effective for well-
defined project areas. BMP
education programs are developed
mainly in funded project areas.
Grand Valley salinity control
project is well monitored. Inten-
sive monitoring would be useful
in at least one other priority
project for pollutants other
than salinity.
Develop adequate technical and financial
assistance mechanisms for agricultural nonpolnt
pollution control needs;
Explore alternative means of promoting construction
or adaption of BMF's.
Develop legislative or administrative proposals.
Track progress of the Grand Valley and Four Mile
Canyon projects and disseminate results to build
support for assistance proposals.
Define educational program needs in priority
problem areas, and secure resources through
Interagency agreements or other means.
Evaluate monitoring and Inspection needs in areas
targeted for implementation activities, and
assign responsibility for monitoring to determine
BMP effectiveness.
December 1980
May 1981
Ongoing, final
formal report:
September 1982
December 1980
Ongoing
-------
Colorado, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NPS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
O
8. Consideration of regulatory
alternatives in water quality management
planning.
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for Implementation to address
program deficiencies and priority
watershed implementation.
10. Agreement on a reporting system to
monitor progress made in implementation.
Livestock wastes only.
Limited
Some of the needed Information
exists in 208 Plan updates,
30Sb reports, State/EPA
Agreements, work plans, and
Conservation District reporting.
Prepare a state agricultural nonpolnt source
control strategy: Draft: January 1981
Final: March 1981
Assess information needs of all involved agencies, December 1980
and discuss with EPA Regional staff.
Comment on EPA Regional guidance on Implementation
reporting. January 1981
Develop and implement reporting system. March 1981
-------
MONTANA
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
1. Geographical prioritization of
problem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagories has been
assigned to designated management agencies.
3. Management agencies responsible for
Implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject matter
to be controlled.
—adequate staff and budget.
—relevant authorities.
—necessary commitment.
A. Identification of BMP's.
5. Provisions for adequate technical and
financial assistance to implement the
control program.
Unprioritlzed Hat of problem
Yes, Conservation Districts
Conservation District staffs and
budgets are minimal, and the
Districts are heavily dependent
upon federal SCS technical
assistance programs.
Yes
Program is heavily dependent
upon limited federal cost-sharing
and technical assistance programs.
Special ACP funds are being used
for Muddy Creek Project.
Set statewide priorities.
January 1981
Develop management agency effectiveness in priority
problem areas'targeted for major•implementation
•activities;
Participate in EPA-NACD Agricultural Implementation
Workshop and prepare state strategy for development
of management agency effectiveness.
December 1980
Evaluate major accomplishments as outlined in above
strategy. ' May 1981
Develop adequate technical and financial assistance
mechanisms 'for'agricultural'nonpoint•pollution
control'needs;
Explore alternative means of promoting construction
or adoption of BMP's. December 1980
Develop legislative or administrative proposals. May 1981
-------
Montana, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS STRATEGY
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
to
I
6. Provisions for an effective educational
program to inform and involve the affected
publics (statewide and priority watershed
level).
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and inspection on priority
projects.
8. Consideration of regulatory
alternatives in water quality management
planning.
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for implementation to
address program deficiencies and
priority watershed Implementation.
10. Agreement on a reporting system to
monitor progress made in implementation.
BMP education programs are well
defined in funded project areas,
but are not well developed
statewide.
Monitoring responsibilities are
clear In active Implementation
areas.
Effectiveness of Lewis and Clark
Conservation District's regulatory
sediment control ordinance is being
monitored.
Limited.
Some of the needed information
exists In 208 Plan updates,
305b reports, State/EPA Agreements,
work plans, and Conservation
District reporting.
Define educational program needs in priority
problem areas, and secure resources through
interagency agreements or other means.
Evaluate monitoring and inspection needs in areas
targeted for implementation activities, and
assign responsibility for monitoring to determine
BMP effectiveness.
December 1980
Ongoing
Prepare a state agricultural nonpoint source
control strategy: Draft
Final
Assess information needs of all involved agencies,
and discuss with EPA Regional staff.
Comment on EPA Regional guidance on implementation
reporting.
Develop and implement reporting system.
January 1981
March 1981
December 1980
January 1981
March 1981
-------
NORTH DAKOTA
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION HEEDED
MILESTONES
1. Geographical prloritization of
problem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagorles has been
assigned to designated management agencies.
3. Management agencies responsible for
implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject
matter to be controlled.
—adequate staff and budget.
—relevant authorities.
—necessary commitment.
Identification of BMP'a.
Target areas have been identified
for possible implementation
projects. A need remains to
prioritize these areas on the
basis of water quality problems
and local Interest.
Yes, Conservation Districts.
Conservation District staffs and
budgets are minimal, and the
Districts are heavily dependent
upon federal SCS technical
assistance programs.
Yes.
Prioritize areas with critical agricultural
nonpoint problems.
January 1981
Develop management agency effectiveness In priority
problem areas targeted for major Implementation
activities;
Participate in EPA-NACD Agricultural Implementation
Workshop and prepare state strategy for development
of management agency effectiveness.
Evaluate major accomplishments as outlined in above
strategy.
December I960
May 1981
-------
North Dakota, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
-P-
5. Provisions for adequate technical and
financial assistance to implement the
control program.
6. Provisions for an effective educational
program to inform and involve the
affected publics (statewide and priority
watershed level).
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and Inspection on priority
projects.
8. Consideration of regulatory
alternatives in water quality management
planning.
Except for a very limited
cost-share program for watershed
protection above wildlife-use
reservoirs, the agricultural
implementation program la heavily
dependent upon federal cost-
sharing and technical
assistance programs.
The state 208 agency has
contracted with the N.D.
Cooperative Extension Service
to provide some of these services
statewide.
Monitoring responsibilities are
clear in active implementation
areas.
Livestock wastes only.
Develop adequate technical and financial assistance
mechanisms for agricultural nonpolnt pollution
control'needs;
Explore alternative means of promoting construction
or adoption of BMP's. December 1980
Develop legislative or administrative proposals. May 1981
Develop a Phase II contract with the Extension Service
for support of the statewide program and watershed
projects. October 1980
Evaluate monitoring and inspection needs in areas
targeted for implementation activities, and
assign responsibility for monitoring to determine
BMP effectiveness. Ongoing
-------
North Dakota, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for Implementation to
address program deficiencies and
priority watershed Implementation.
10. Agreement on a reporting system
to monitor progress In Implementation.
Limited
Some of the needed Information
exists In 208 Plan updates,
305b reports, State/EPA
Agreements, work plans, and
Conservation District reports.
Prepare a state agricultural nonpolnt source
control strategy: Draft January 1981
Final March 1981
Assess information needs of all involved agencies,
and discuss with EPA Regional staff. December 1980
Comment on EPA Regional guidance on Implementation
reporting. January 1981
Develop and Implement reporting system. March 1981
-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
1. Geographical prioritization of
problem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagorles has been
assigned to designated management agencies.
3. Management agencies responsible for
implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject matter
to be controlled.
—adequate staff and budget
—relevant authorities
—necessary commitment.
4. Identification of BMP's.
5. Provisions for adequate technical and
financial assistance to implement the
control program.
Yes
Yes. More specific management
agency responsbllities are spelled
out during Phase II activities in
Water Quality Study Areas (HQSA).
Conservation District staffs and
budgets are minimal, and the
program is heavily dependent upon
federal cost-sharing and technical
assistance programs. Several
208—funded contracts with
Conservation Districts have been
very effective in providing for
on-the-ground coordination of
implementation activities.
Site-specific BMP's are identified
during Phase II activities in
WQSAls.
A limited state cost-share program
is in place for animal waste and
lake improvement projects.
Periodic review
January 1981
Develop management agency effectiveness in HQSA's
targeted for major implementation activities;
Participate in EPA-NACD Agricultural Implementation
Workshop and prepare state strategy for development
of management agency effectiveness.
Evaluate major accomplishments as outlined in the
above strategy.
December 1980
May 1981
Develop adequate technical and financial assistance
mechanisms tot agricultural nonpolnt pollution control
needs:
Explore alternative means of promoting construction
or adoption of BMP's.
Complete Phase I of Agricultural FMAF Study
December 1980
September 1981
-------
South Dakota, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NPS PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
6. Provisions for an effective educational
program to inform and Involve the affected
publics (statewide and priority watershed
level).
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and inspection on priority
projects.
8. Consideration of regulatory
alternatives in water quality management
planning.
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for implementation to address
program deficiencies and priority
watershed implementation.
10. Agreement on a reporting system to
monitor progress made in implementation.
The Water Quality Study Areas
provide a good focus for obtaining
public input and support. With
more WQSA's reaching implementation
phase, resource requirements for
education will increase. These
programs will be developed by local
management agencies, but will
require assistance from other
state and federal agencies.
Monitoring responsibilities
are clear in active implementation
areas.
Yes
Limited
Some of the needed information
exists in 208 Plans, 305b reports,
State/EPA Agreements, work plans',
and Conservation District reports.
Develop a contract with the Extension Service
to provide program support statewide.
June 1981
Evaluate monitoring and inspection needs in areas
targeted for implementation activities, and
assign responsibility for monitoring to determine
BMP effectiveness.
Periodic review of progress made in implementing
the South Dakota Sediment and Erosion Control Act.
Ongoing
Prepare a state agricultural nonpoint source
control strategy:
Draft
Final
Assess information needs of all Involved agencies,
and discuss with EPA Regional staff.
Comment on EPA Regional guidance on implementation
reporting.
Develop and Implement reporting system.
Ongoing
January 1981
March 1981
December 1980
January 1981
March 1981
-------
UTAH
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
00
I
1. Geographical prlorJtlzation of
problem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagorles has been
assigned to designated management agencies.
3. Management agencies responsible for
implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject.
• matter to be controlled. <
—adequate staff and budget.
—relevant authorities.
—necessary commitment.
A. Identification of BMP'a.
Considerable progress has been
made In the development of detailed
agricultural assessments for two
areawide 208'a, Mountalnland and
Ulntah Basin. The Utah Dept. of
Agriculture is currently developing
detailed statewide agricultural
assessments in concert with
water quality agencies. Thus, a
statewide priorltization has not
yet been attempted.
Soil Conservation Districts have
been designated as management
agencies.
Conservation District staffs and
budgets are minimal, and the
program is heavily dependent upon
federal cost-sharing and technical
assistance programs.
Complete for some areawide plans,
but not statewide.
Complete agricultural nonpoint assessment and
prioritlzation of problem watersheds.
March 1981
Develop management agency effectiveness in priority
problem areas targeted'fot major Implementation
activities:
Participate in EPA-NACD Agricultural Implementation
Workshop and prepare state strategy for development
of management agency effectiveness.
Evaluate major accomplishments as outlined in
above strategy.
Complete a statewide identification as part of
Utah Dept. of Agriculture subagrcement.
December 1980
May 1981
March 1981
-------
Utah, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
5. Provisions for adequate technical and
financial assistance to implement the
control program.
6. Provisions for an effective educational
program to inform and involve the affected
publics (statewide and priority watershed
level).
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and inspection on priority
projects.
8. Consideration of regulatory
alternatives in water quality management
planning.
Utah has two major Implementation
projects: Snake Creek Rural Clean
Water Program and Ulntah Basin
Special ACP Project. The
agricultural implementation program
is heavily dependent upon federal
cost-sharing and technical
assistance programs.
BMP education programs are well
defined in funded project areas,
but public participation and
BMP education programs are not
well developed statewide.
Monitoring responsibilities are
clear in active implementation
areas.
Livestock wastes only.
Develop adequate technical and financial assistance
mechanisms far agricultural nonpolnt pollution
control needs:
Explore alternative means of promoting construction
or adoption of BMP'a.
Develop legislative or administrative proposals.
Define educational program needs In problem priority
areas, and secure resources through interagency
agreements or other means.
Evaluate monitoring and Inspection needs in areas
targeted for Implementation activities, and
assign responsibility for monitoring to determine
BMP effectiveness.
December 1980
Milestone yet
to be
established.
December 1980
Ongoing
-------
Utah, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
O
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for implementation to
address program deficiencies and
priority watershed implementation.
10. Agreement on a reporting system to
monitor progress made in implementation.
Limited
Some of the needed information
exists in 208 Plans, 305b reports,
State/EPA Agreements, work plans,
and Conservation District reports.
Prepare a state agricultural nonpoint source
control strategy:
Draft January 1981
Final March 1981
Assess Information needs of all involved agencies,
and discuss with EPA Regional staff. December 1980
Comment on EPA Regional guidance on Implementation
reporting. January 1981
Develop and implement reporting system. March 1981
-------
WYOMING
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NPS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
I
NJ
1. Geographical prloritlzation of
problem watersheds.
2. Responsibility for control of
pollutants or source catagories has been
assigned to designated management agencies.
3. Management agencies responsible for
implementing the program have:
—technical expertise in the subject
matter to be controlled.
—adequate staff and budget.
—relevant authorities.
—necessary commitment.
Some problem areas have been
identified, but a geographic
priorltizatlon based on a water
quality assessment has not been
completed.
The Wyoming State Conservation
Commission is responsible for
assisting and coordinating
areawlde and local planning, and
for technical assistance for
agricultural nonpoint source
control throughout the state.
Counties are the designated
management agencies, and would
transfer operational
responsibilities to local
Conservation Districts.
Conservation District staffs and
budgets are minimal, and the
Districts are heavily dependent
upon federal SCS technical
assistance programs.:
Complete agricultural nonpoint assessment and
prioritizatlon of problem watersheds.
January 1981
Develop management agency effectiveness in priority
problem areas targeted for malor implementation
activities:
Participate In EPA-NACD Agricultural Implementation
Workshop and prepare state strategy for development
of management agency effectiveness.
Evaluate major accomplishments as outlined in above
strategy.
December 1980
May 1981
-------
Wyoming, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
I
NJ
4. Identification of BMP'a.
5. Provisions for adequate technical and
financial assistance to implement the
control program.
6. Provisions for an effective educational
program to inform and involve the affected
publics (statewide and priority watershed
level).
7. Assignment of responsibilities and
formulation of procedures for BMP
monitoring and inspection on priority
projects.
No identification of BMP'a on a
statewide basis. Site-specific
BMP's would be developed on
a project basis.
Program is heavily dependent upon
limited federal cost-sharing and
technical assistance programs.
No Special ACP, RCWP, or Clean
Lakes Program projects have been
approved to date, however.
Section 208 planning meets
procedural requirements for
public participation. BMP
education programs have not been
developed.
No operational Implementation
projects are underway yet.
Develop adequate technical and financial
assistance mechanisms for agricultural nonpoint
pollutlon control needs;
Explore alternative means of promoting construction
or adoption of BMP's. December 1980
Develop legislative or administrative^ proposals. May 1981
Define educational program needs and secure
resources through interagency agreements or
other means. December 1980
Evaluate monitoring and Inspection needs in areas
targeted for Implementation activities, and
assign responsibility for monitoring to determine
BMP effectiveness. Ongoing
-------
Wyoming, continued
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A STATE
AGRICULTURAL NFS CONTROL PROGRAM
STATUS
ACTION NEEDED
MILESTONES
I
to
8. Consideration of regulatory alternatives
in water quality management planning,
9. Agreement on a schedule of
milestones for implementation to address
program deficiencies and priority
watershed implementation.
10. Agreement on a reporting system to
monitor progress made In Implementation.
Livestock wastes only.
Limited
Some of the needed Information
exists In 208 Plan updates,
305b reports, State/EPA
Agreements, work plans, and
Conservation District reporting.
Prepare a state agricultural nonpoint source control
strategy:
Draft January 1981
Final March 1981
Assess information needs of all Involved agencies,
and discuss with EPA Regional staff. December 1980
Comment on EPA Regional guidance on implementation
reporting. January 1981
Develop and implement reporting system. March 1981
-------
III. EPA Region VIII Agricultural Nonpoint Implementation Program Needs
(EPA Agency Staff)
ACTION NEEDED MILESTONE FOR COMPLETION
Insure that implementation efforts are
prioritized on the basis of water quality
assessment and other criteria.
Prepare state-specific guidance on
water quality assessment report
needs for FY 82 water quality
management process and State/EPA
Agreement. October 31, 1980
Meet with individual state water
quality agencies to review water
quality assessments and agree on
priority water quality problems
to be addressed in the FY 82 State
/EPA negotiations and FY 82 Section
208 funding process. January 31, 1981
Insure that implementation efforts are
based upon sound statewide strategies that
lead toward effective self-sustaining
programs.
Prepare guidance on agricultural nonpoint
source control strategies to be prepared
as part of FY 82 208 funding process. November 30, 1980
Complete EPA review of draft state
agricultural nonpoint strategies. February 1, 1981
Improve management agency effectiveness,
with emphasis on development of adequate
technical and financial assistance
mechanisms.
Develop final Regional guidance on
management agency designation and
roles. October 15, 1980
-24-
-------
Organize and hold a regional work-
shop for agricultural management
agencies, jointly with the National
Association of Conservation Districts.
The workshop will address financial and
institutional mechanisms for improving
management agency effectiveness. December 3, 1980
Encourage closer coordination between
water quality agencies and agricultural
agencies through cooperative agreement
process or other means. Ongoing
Provide a direct channel of
communication between EPA
and interest groups through
a bi-monthly newsletter and
personal contact. Ongoing
Track and evaluate implmentation efforts.
Where possible, participate directly
in implementation planning through
ACP and RCWP coordinating committees
and Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Program. Ongoing
Develop Regional guidance on an
adequate implementation reporting
system:
Draft December 1980
Final February 1981
-25-
-------